Amar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25038 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-500 Year-2018 Thana- GARDANIBAG District- Patna ====================================================== AMAR KUMAR Son of Vinod Yadav Resident of Village - Masadi, P.S.- Sultanganj, Distt - Bhagalpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 25-07-2019 No one appears for the petitioner. Learned APP for the State is present.

This Court has gone through the materials available on the record and is proceeding to dispose of the application on the basis of those materials.

Petitioner in the present case is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Gardanibagh P.S. Case No.500 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 468, 471, 472 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution story this petitioner had been impersonating the candidates who had appeared before the appointing authority and in the written examination as well as in physical fitness test. The petitioner allegedly got success in getting appointment on the post of constable after managing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25038 of 2019(3) dt.25-07-2019 2/2 some other person to appear in his place in the various tests. There is an allegation of cheating against him in the process. It is alleged that he has also committed certain acts of forgery. Learned APP has referred to the impugned order stating that the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner has been refused on finding certain materials in the case diary. In the given facts and circumstances of the case where there are specific allegations against the petitioner that he had obtained appointment by putting someone to appear in his place in the written examination and the handwriting and signature of the petitioner does not match with the signature of the person who appeared in the examination, the allegation being serious in nature and the materials available on the record, I am not inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

This application is dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U T