← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9756/2026bail granted

Geeta Kumari @ Gita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-26Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9756 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2025 Thana- SIDHWALIYA District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Geeta Kumari @ Gita Kumari Daughter of Sakaldeo Pandit Resident of Village- Dangsi, P.S.- Sidhwalia, District- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Patna bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mithilesh Kr. Upadhyay, Adv.

Mr. Tetara Kumari, Adv.

Mr. Raju Prasad, Adv.

Mr. Harendra Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Renuka Ratnakar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-03-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and in sum and substance the allegation is that petitioner was appointed as Teacher, based on forged and fabricated marksheet.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that prior to instituting the instant FIR, no show-cause was issued to the petitioner seeking her

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9756 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026 2/2 explanation. It is also submitted that if a show-cause would have been given to the petitioner, perhaps the FIR would not have been instituted after the authorities had perused her evidence. It is next submitted that the services of the petitioner also stands terminated.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds 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 Sidhwalia P.S. Case No.183/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T