Lalit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20629 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-673 Year-2023 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa ====================================================== Lalit Kumar Son Of Pramod Sah Resident Of Village - Goriyari, Ward No.12, P.S. - Salkhua, District - Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. Perused the case diary. 2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 673 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 414, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(c) & 66(d) of the I.T. Act.

3.

Prosecution case in short is that petitioner used to participate in the competitive examination and used to take 60,000/- to 70,000/- and after the job, accused persons including the petitioner used to take 5-6 lakhs from each selected candidate.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20629 of 2024(4) dt.17-05-2024 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that from perusal of the FIR, it appears that one Suraj Kumar @ Niraj Kumar is the main accused, who used to take amount for providing help to get employment in selection of police constables.

5.

On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Referring to paragraph No. 17 of the case diary, it is submitted that there is involvement of the petitioner in the present case. 6.

Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, there being allegation levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.

Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T