Rupam Bharti v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14753 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2021 Thana- SANHAULA District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== RUPAM BHARTI D/o Satish Chandra Mandal @ Chhatish Chandra Mandal Resident of Village and P.O.- Mathurapur, P.S.- Kahalgaon, DistrictBhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Anirudh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Mishra, APP For the Vigilance :

Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, Spl. P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Spl.P.P. for Vigilance and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 409, 420 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and the informant alleges that the intermediate marksheet of the petitioner was found to be forged and fabricated as the same was never issued by the Bihar School Examination Board, based on which the petitioner had sought appointment as Panchayat Teacher.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14753 of 2022(2) dt.20-09-2022 2/3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that the allegation for the present is in the realm of allegation which is still to be adjudicated by a Court of Competent Jurisdiction and thus sending the petitioner to jail at this stage would be a travesty of justice when she has taught to him for so long that is nearly 14 years, it is also submitted that no opportunity was given to the petitioner to explain her side of the case and directly the FIR came to be instituted. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned Spl.P.P. oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, but are not able to meet the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that no opportunity was given to the petitioner before instituting the present FIR.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court 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 Sanhaulla P.S.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14753 of 2022(2) dt.20-09-2022 3/3 Case No. 111 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Shivam/- U T