Chandni Kumari @ Chandani Kumar v. The Union Of India Through C.B.I.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.29399 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3 Year- 2013 Thana -C.B.I CASE District- PATNA ====================================================== CHANDNI KUMARI @ CHANDANI KUMAR daughter of Lal Babu Chaurasia, R/o Village- Sirsiya Bazar, P.S.- Bela, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The Union of India through C.B.I.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar Sinha (SC-CBI) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 22-09-2016 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha for the petitioner and Mr. Bipin Kumar Sinha for the C.B.I.

The petitioner got herself appointed by the Department of Post and Telegraph on the post of Gramin Dak Sevaks. Such appointment of several persons was made in 2009.

Subsequently, it revealed that in completing the selection process, serious irregularities were committed by the Authorities in connivance with the appointee(s). A preliminary inquiry was made in which diverse certificate(s) produced by the appointee(s) were verified. Many of such certificate(s) were found fake/forged. Having found so, RC Case No. 03 of 2013 was filed which gave arise to Special Case No. 04 of 2013, wherein the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29399 of 2016 (4) dt.22-09-2016 2/3 According to the prosecution, she got herself appointed on the basis of forged certificate purporting to have been issued by Bihar Shanskrit Siksha Board, Patna under Code No. 1411, Roll No. 545. On verification from the records of the Bihar Shanskrit Siksha Board, it came to light that the said certificate was forged. At item No. 62 of the report submitted by the Controller of the Examination of the Board, Vibha Kumari was the candidate with Code No. 1411, Roll No. 545, who had passed in the 2nd Division. The certificate produced by the petitioner signed by her is produced wherefrom, it appears the same was shown to have been issued in favour of the petitioner certifying that she passed in the 1st Division.

It is submitted by the petitioner that she has also passed the Matriculation Examination. The service was obtained on the basis of Matriculation Examination.

Mr. Sinha, on the other hand, produced documents which indicate that such claim for appointment was made on the basis of the certificate issued by the Bihar Shanskrit Siksha Board. It is also submitted that several accused(s) persons identically placed have been refused anticipatory bail by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.12.2015 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 43596 of 2015 and analogous cases.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29399 of 2016 (4) dt.22-09-2016 3/3 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my view, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail. The prayer is rejected.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) rohit/- U T