Tej Narayan Roy @ Tej Narayan Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46788 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2026 Thana- PARBATTA District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Tej Narayan Roy @ Tej Narayan Ray S/O Late Brahmdeo Roy @ Brahmdeo Ray Resident of Village- Japteli, P.S- Parbatta, Distt.- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ravi Prakash Dwivedi, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs.Anita Kumari, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-07-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 26 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 19.02.2026, a raiding team of the Electricity Department inspected the petitioner's flour mill on secret information regarding theft of electricity. During inspection, it was found that although the petitioner had a valid industrial electricity connection, he had allegedly bypassed the meter by cutting the incoming threephase service wire and drawing electricity through an unauthorized connection. It is alleged that the petitioner thereby dishonestly abstracted electrical energy, causing a loss of Rs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46788 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026 2/3 2,64,997/- to SBPDCL.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present bail application with liberty to avail the remedy as provided under the Bihar Electricity Duty Act, 2018, in respect of the offence alleged under Section 135 relating to theft of electricity, resulting in an alleged revenue loss of Rs. 2,64,997/- to the South Bihar Power Distribution Company Limited. It is further prayed that four weeks' time be granted to the petitioner to deposit the aforesaid amount.
5. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on instructions, that the petitioner seeks to avail the statutory remedy for compounding the total loss determined as Rs. 2,64,997/- within a period of four weeks, I find that no purpose would be served if the petitioner is sent behind the bar, as the offence is compoundable.
6. For the said purpose, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner for a period of six weeks. However, if the petitioner fails to avail the statutory remedy or deposit the aforesaid amount within the stipulated period, the law shall take its own course.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46788 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026 3/3
7. The learned District Court after being satisfied may pass appropriate order in accordance with law by releasing the petitioner on bail on such terms and conditions as it deems fit and proper.
8. The bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J) mantreshwar/- U T