Jageshwar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15870 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2024 Thana- Vishwavidalaya District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Jageshwar Kumar Son of Dukhan Mandal Resident Of Village- Bhuwalpur, Ps- Nathnagar, Dist- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 02-04-2025 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned APP for the State.

2. The present Criminal Miscellaneous application has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "BNSS, 2023") for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner who is apprehending his arrest in connection with University P.S. Case No. 38 of 2024, lodged on 01.08.2024, under Sections 319(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "BNS, 2023") and under Section 10 of the Bihar Examination Act, 1981.

3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against two named accused persons, including the present petitioner, with the allegation that one of the accused, namely, Rajiv

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15870 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 2/2 Kumar, appeared for the examination on behalf of the petitioner.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel further submits that the petitioner did not sit for the examination and is completely unaware of who appeared in his place. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has been unnecessarily made an accused in the present case. Counsel also submits that the antecedent of the petitioner is clean.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it is the petitioner at whose instance the interpolation was made.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U T