Aditya Raj v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9126 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2019 Thana- AIRPORT District- Patna ====================================================== Aditya Raj Son Of Ravindra Prasad R/O- Choti Badalpura, Lal Chowk, Danapur, P.S.- Khagaul, District - Patna, Pin Code - 801105 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Avinash Raushan For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Airport P.S. Case No.28 of 2019, dated 31.01.2019, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the FIR, the informant alleged that pursuant to the advertisement for the post of appointment of driver, police and fire fighting persons, examination was held at different centres. Further, after they crossed the physical efficiency test, were called for driving test and were supposed to give their respective thumb impression on the scanner which were preserved. Later, it was found that the thumb impression as also hand writing of some of the candidates including the
2/4 petitioner did not match with the original samples.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner had no knowledge of the lodging of the FIR and came to know about the same only after the notice issued to him on 29.08.2025, whereafter, he took steps to file an application for anticipatory bail before the learned court below. It is further submitted that the petitioner himself appeared in all the tests conducted, but due to some technical fault in the software, his thumb impression could not be properly recognized, as a result of which he was wrongly classified in the category of candidates whose signatures/thumb impressions did not match.
It is also submitted that in respect of other similarly situated candidates, the discrepancy was later resolved and they were made free. Learned counsel further submits that a similarly situated coaccused, on identical allegations, approached this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 12931 of 2026 and was granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench vide order dated 26.02.2026. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
3/4
6. Considering the fact that a similarly situated coaccused has been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Patna Sadar, Patna/Successor Court in connection with Airport P.S. Case No.28 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS as well as the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors should be the family member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document/ personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide; (ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself; (iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
4/4 cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) shikha/- U T