Krishna Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.22336 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -65 Year- 2017 Thana -AURANGABAD TOWN DistrictAURANGABAD ======================================================

1. Krishna Singh, son of Late Sahdeo Singh, Resident of Village- Gangti, Post & Police Station- Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad.

2. Mahendra Singh, Son of Late Ramlal Singh, Resident of villageChiraela, Post- Jagdishpur, Police Station- Barun District- Aurangabad.

3. Devendra Kumar, Son of Late Shiva Singh, Resident of VillageBalabigha, Post- Khanetu, Police Station- Tekari, District- Gaya.

4. Harinandan Prasad, Son of Late Jagdish Prasad, Resident of villageItavan, Post- Raushan-ganj, Police Station- Session-ganj, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ataur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 06-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP representing the State.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No. 65 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 409, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, the petitioners with the help of Chandeshwar Chaudhary and Ranjit Kumar, both clerk of Civil Surgeon office, created forged document vide memo no. 7 (4) dated 05.08.2016 and with the help of that forged document they succeeded in obtaining letter of appointment in their favour and accordingly,

joined their respective posts within Aurangabad District on 11.03.2016. It has further been alleged that on 07.02.2017 vide memo no. 238 all the forged appointments have been cancelled by the informant.

Submission is of false implication and that the petitioners have committed no offence, it is true and correct that the petitioners were reinstated in their respective service in compliance of the order passed by the Hon'ble Court and again they were removed from their service as per order of the Hon'ble Court passed in L. P.A. It has further been submitted that through the writ petition again the petitioners were reinstated since then they are performing their duty and received salary. Again they were terminated on 14.10.2014 but the Hon'ble Apex Court stayed the operation of order passed in L.P.A. against the petitioners, thereafter, vide memo no. 632 dated 01.03.2016 petitioners joined their posts, the petitioners have not joined on the basis of letter no. 7 (4) dated 05.08.2016, the informant only with a view to save his skin has lodged this case against the petitioners also and as such they deserve sympathetic consideration.

Learned APP opposes the prayer of pre-arrest bail. In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering that in the light of the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court

dated 10.11.2014 the petitioners were directed to join their posts and as such the petitioners above named, in case of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, shall be released on bail on execution of bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in connection with Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No. 65 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T