Dr. Dibanshu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar Through The Director General, Vigilance, Patna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.29230 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -101 Year- 2016 Thana -VIGILANCE District- PATNA ====================================================== Dr. Dibanshu Kumar Son of late Ramanand Sinha Resident of VillageKatahani Bagh Ratanpur, P.S. Chapra town, District Saran. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Through The Director General, Vigilance, Patna .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.29458 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -105 Year- 2016 Thana -VIGILANCE District- PATNA ====================================================== Dr. Dibanshu Kumar, son of Late Ramanand Sinha, resident of VillageKatahani Bagh Ratanpur, P.S.- Chapra Town, District- Saran. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Director General, Vigilance, Patna. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.29230 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vipin Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rama Kant Sharma(L.O,I/C Vigi) (In Cr.Misc. No.29458 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vipin Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma (L.O.,Inc.,Vigilance) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 07-07-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Vigilance Police Station Case No. 101 of 2016 and Vigilance Police Station Case No. 105 of 2016, disclosing
offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 477(A), 409, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2), 13(1)(D) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the First Information Report has submitted that there is no allegation against the petitioner of any misappropriation. The only allegation in the F.I.R. is that some of the students of the College, who were not registered with the University, were allowed to appear at the examination. It is the case of the petitioner that he being the Examination Controller did not have any role in financial matters. It is alleged against him that certain candidate were allowed to appear for the University examination without registration number. As a matter of fact, altogether seven cases of similar nature have been lodged against the petitioner and out of seven, the petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail in three cases vide Cr. Misc. No. 27252 of 2017 and Cr. Misc. No. 27296 of 2016 along within Cr. Misc. No. 27975 of 2017 by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It has also been submitted that there is no chance fleeing away of the petitioner during the investigation or trial, if he is allowed to be released on anticipatory bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Vigilance, North Bihar, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Vigilance Police Station Case No. 101 of 2016 and Vigilance Police Station Case No. 105 of 2016, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Arvind Srivastava, J) brajesh/- U T