Sandhya Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 12425 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-360 Year-2018 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== Sandhya Singh, Female, aged about 45 years, Wife of Rabindra Kumar Singh, Resident of Village-Bara, P.S-Atri, District-Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manindra Kishore Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ajay Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 30-03-2022 Heard the parties.
The case is being taken up from defect side.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to submit the original petition along with attested affidavits and also remove all the defects pointed out by the Registry within two weeks from today.
The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of her arrest in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 360 of 2018 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 196, 197,198, 199, 201, 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
2/4 petitioner is a lady who was holding the post of Mukhiya of the Gram Panchayat at the relevant point. Some persons got selected and appointed as Panchayat teachers on the basis of forged certificate. The petitioner was the recommending authority for appointment of one of such person and, therefore, the petitioner is being sought to be arrested of being involved in committing forgery.
Learned counsel submits that the petitioner cannot be said to have committed the forgery and a teacher who has submitted his documents could be verified only through the concerned department and from the enquiry it reveals that it is much later point of time that it was came to light that the applicant has submitted forged documents. She therefore cannot be said to have committed the offence.
Considering the aforesaid finding that the petitioner's role is only recommending and others have already been granted anticipatory bail, I am inclined to allow the petitioner on bail, in the event of arrest she shall be released on anticipatory bail, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C, which are as under:-
1. The petitioner, above named shall furnish personal bond with her recent self-attested photograph and surety of the
3/4 like amount on the following conditions at the satisfaction of the investigating officer;
2. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and make herself available for interrogation whenever required;
3. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;
4. The petitioner shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
5. The petitioner shall not leave the territory of Bihar, without prior permission of the Court, till trial is over;
6. The petitioner shall maintain law and order;
7. The petitioner shall, at the time of execution of the bond, furnish her address and mobile number to the investigating officer, and the court concerned, and shall not change the residence till the final disposal of the case;
8. The petitioner shall surrender her passport, if any, before the investigating officer within a week and, if she does not possess any passport, she shall file an affidavit to that effect before the investigating officer;
4/4 9.The petitioner shall regularly remain present during the trial, and cooperate the Hon'ble court to complete the trial for the above offences.
(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Anand Kr.
U T