← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18224/2019rejected

Dharmendra Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar And ANR

2019-07-17Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18224 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2017 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Begusarai ====================================================== Dharmendra Kumar Jha S/o Ram Udgar Jha, Resident of Village- Sohilbara, P.S.- Mansoor Chak, District-Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Police Inspector Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Navesh Nandan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 17-07-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No.88 of 2017 registered under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation, in sum and substance, is that the petitioner got appointment on the basis of forged and fabricated mark sheet.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected on 11.01.2018. It is submitted that some of the accused persons against whom same and similar allegation was made, have already been granted anticipatory bail by different benches of this court (Annexure 3 series).

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18224 of 2019(3) dt.17-07-2019 2/2 It appears that the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected but the petitioner did not surrender in the court below and seek regular bail. There is specific allegation that it was the petitioner, who submitted forged and fabricated mark sheet and got appointment. Having considered the facts aforesaid, I do not find any fresh ground for reconsideration of the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is once again rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Harish/- U T