Ravi Raj Anand v. State Of Bihar Through S.P. Economics Offence, Ps Patna.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24909 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2022 Thana- ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BIHAR District- Patna ====================================================== Ravi Raj Anand Son of Ram Bahadur Yadav R/o vill.- Pipra, P.S.- Sorbajpur, Distt.- Saharsa, At present Mohalla - Near Mahavir Lane (Gandhi Chowk), Ward No.- 48, Jhainchak, P.S.- Parsa, Distt.- Patan. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
State of Bihar through S.P. Economics Offence, PS Patna. Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Raghaw Kumar, Advocate For the EOU :
Mr. Vishwanath Pd. Sinha, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Vijay Anand, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-07-2023 Heard Mr. Raghaw Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. V.N.P. Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the EOU, assisted by Mr. Vijay Anand, learned counsel.
Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.
Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 26.12.2022 in connection with Economic Offence (Patna) P.S. Case No. 40 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 24.12.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 469, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 66 of I.T. Act and Section 10 of the
2/4 Bihar School Examination Act.
According to prosecution case, under a conspiracy, the examinee Ajay Kumar in connivance with others, had stealthily made pages of the Answer-sheet no. 5092573 viral on social media wherein the role of the invigilator-teacher Sachindra Nath Jyoti appeared suspicious.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it has come during investigation that the petitioner has confessed that he has received the question paper from mobile no. 9199781806 and the same was forwarded to Raushan Kumar mobile no. 9973981100 and the answer was sent back on the same no. from which he received on insistence of co-accused, Kailash Sah. He further submits that the petitioner has not made any confession rather he was forced to put his signature on the blank paper. He further submits that except the confessional statement of the petitioner, no other material has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence and no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession or the house of the petitioner. The prosecution after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the
3/4 petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 26.12.2022. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the EOU has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate I, Patna in connection with Economic Offence (Patna) P.S. Case No. 40 of 2022, subject to the following conditions:-
1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
4/4 cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T