IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54744 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2025 Thana- Parasi District- Arwal ====================================================== 1. Shambhu Kumar @ Shambhu Prasad S/O Yogendra Prasad Resident of Vill.- Rampur, P.S.- Parasi, Dist.- Arwal 2. Yogendra Prasad S/O Late Ganauri Prasad Resident of Vill.- Rampur, P.S.- Parasi, Dist.- Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Pathak Mr. Sumit Kumar Bhagat For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala- A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Raj Kumar Rajesh- Advocate Mr. Girish Chandra- Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 5 16-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant. 2. The Investigating Officer of the case in compliance of the order dated 10.03.2026 is present in the Court. 3. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 105 of the B.N.S. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that petitioners had put electric wire around Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54744 of 2025(5) dt.16-03-2026 2/4 their orchard and the son of the informant got electrocuted. It is next submitted that petitioner no.1 is son of petitioner no.2. It is further submitted that the occurrence took place at village Rampur Baina whereas petitioner no.1 resides at Arwal and hardly comes to the village as he earns at Arwal. 5. It is next submitted that informant alleges that his son got electrocuted in the orchard of the petitioners, but then, during the course of investigation, it has not come that the orchard was fenced by wire rather during the course of investigation, it transpired that there was submersible pump within the orchard and a wire was coming out of the submersible pump and it appears that son of the informant entered the orchard with a view to pluck fruits, but then, came in contact with the wire and got electrocuted. It is further submitted that during the course of supervision, the involvement of petitioner no.1 has not come, but the case against the petitioner no.2 has been found to be true. 6. Learned A.P.P. as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application. The investigating Officer of the Case, who is present in the Court, does not dispute the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54744 of 2025(5) dt.16-03-2026 3/4 involvement of petitioner no.1 in the case during the course of investigation has not transpired, but then, submits that petitioner no.2 resides in the village and the statement of the villagers was recorded wherein they have stated that children used to enter the orchard of the petitioners and used to pluck fruits, as such, wire was put around the trees standing within the orchard. It is also submitted that he has video footage of the place of occurrence and from perusal of the same, it would manifest that wires were found tied around the trees having current. It is thus submitted that it appears that the trees were wired with a view to ensure that no one enters the orchard for the purposes of plucking fruits. It is thus submitted that the same was a rash and negligent act on the part of the accused persons. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner no.1, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Parasi P. S. Case No.50 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54744 of 2025(5) dt.16-03-2026 4/4 Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. 8. The application stands allowed. 9. So far as petitioner no.2 is concerned, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner no.2. 10. The prayer of the petitioner no.2 for anticipatory bail stands rejected. 11. The personal appearance of the Investigating Officer of the case is dispensed with. vikash/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T