Ranvijay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23713 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2022 Thana- GURUA District- Gaya ====================================================== Ranvijay Kumar S/O Mohanlal Singh R/O Vill.- Waisa Jat Dumri, P.S.- Punpun, Dist.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Madhuri Lata, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 05-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Gurua P.S. Case No. 87 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 468, 469, 470 and 471 of the I.P.C.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that one Narendra Kumar, Son of Late Bipat Mahto, working on the post of In-charge, Headmaster, High School, Gaya gave a written application before the Officer-in-Charge, Gurua P.S. on 16.03.2022 alleging therein that District Program Officer, Secondary Education, Gaya vide letter no. 64 dated 15.02.2022 had directed him to institute FIR against the petitioner for passing Annual Matriculation Examination, 1984 from High
2/4 School, Gurua suppressing facts. Based on the said written application, a case was registered vide Gurua P.S. Case No. 87 of 2022 dated 16.03.2022 under Sections 420, 468, 469, 470 and 471 of I.P.C.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one Mahendra Pratap Singh had made a complain before Bihar School Examination Board and thereafter, filed a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 15172 of 2016 before this Court alleging that Board had not taken action on his complain. In response, the Board took action in the case and without conducting a proper enquiry, the Board cancelled the matriculation result of the petitioner vide advertisement no. 48 of 2017 dated 21.04.2017 on the ground that petitioner had passed matriculation twice from two different schools in two different years with two different date of birth by keeping the Board in dark. Thereafter, it is stated that the Board directed the District Education Officer, Gaya to institute FIR against the petitioner. Consequently as per the instruction received, the In-charge, Headmaster, High School, Gurua gave a written application based on which, the FIR has been instituted. The petitioner further submits that the complainant, Mahendra Pratap Singh is his own uncle and has personal grudge with the petitioner due to
3/4 their being a property dispute. There are may civil and criminal litigation pending between the father of the petitioner and said Mahendra Prasad Singh, for example, Title Suit No. 113 of 2012, Complaint Case No. 1046 C of 2017 and Cr. Appeal No. 147 of 2015. The petitioner also submits that the petitioner had never appeared in any matriculation examination in the year 1983 and that only once he had appeared and successfully cleared the examination in the year 1984. Hence, as per the petitioner, the Board's decision to cancel the matriculation result of the petitioner granted to him is not sustainable in the eye of law and the petitioner has challenged the same by filing a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 12555 of 2018 which is still pending adjudication before this Court. The petitioner, therefore, submits that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and that he has no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail.
6. From a perusal of the FIR, it is apparent that the Incharge, Headmaster, High School, Gurua without any independent application of mind, has simply carried out the instruction/order given to him by the District Education Officer, Gaya. Therefore, the informant/complainant himself did not
4/4 enquire into the matter before lodging the FIR and it has been done in a mechanical manner and also given the fact that the entire matter is sub-judice and at large in CWJC No. 12555 of 2018, it would not be appropriate at this stage to deny the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail. This Court is thus inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, named above, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks from today, 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 CJM, Sherghati, Gaya in connection with Gurua P.S. Case No. 87 of 2022 , subject to the conditions laid down under section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) kiran/- U T