Sanjay Kumar v. The Dept. Of Vigilance, Through Its Director General, Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16987 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2025 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar S/O Ashnarayan Thakur Village- Madhopur, P.S- Madhuban, Dist.- East-Champaran at Motihari.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Dept. of Vigilance, through its Director General, Bihar Patna 2.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Onkar Nath, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under section 7(a) of P.C. Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant has submitted online application for mutation of his land. On 25.11.2025, the said land was inspected by the petitioner, thereafter, the petitioner demanded Rs. 5000/- bribe from the complainant for his mutation work and threatened that if the bribe amount is not paid then his mutation application would be rejected. Thereafter, trap was laid on 27.11.2025 and accused was caught red handed while accepting the bribe amount of Rs.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16987 of 2026(3) dt.18-04-2026 2/3 4500/-.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from perusal of Annexure P/2 it will transpire that the petitioner has forwarded the form for mutation prior to the trap on 27.11.2025. It has further been submitted that there was no occasion for the complainant to pay bribe as alleged as the petitioner has already forwarded the mutation form. He has further submitted that he is a Government Employee and is languishing in judicial custody since 28.11.2025.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the Vigilance Department have vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Vigilance Department and has submitted that the petitioner was caught red handed while accepting the bribe amount of Rs. 4500/-.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16987 of 2026(3) dt.18-04-2026 3/3 Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court of Special Judge, Vigilance, Patna.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Shubham/- U T