← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./26665/2020rejected

Santan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2021-01-29Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26665 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-263 Year-2019 Thana- MAGADH MEDICAL COLLEGE District- Gaya ====================================================== SANTAN KUMAR Son of Late Raja Ram Paswan Resident of VillageEguni, Post Office- Paraiya, Police Station- Praiya, District- Gaya. at present resident of Mohalla- Ambedkar more, Katari Hill Road, Police StationChandauti, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Magadh Medical P.S. Case No. 263 of 2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420/467/471/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation is that two In-charge Headmasters, namely, Gupteshwar Sharma and Prahlad Singh, as well as this petitioner who was a clerk in the school allowed fake students of the school to fill up examination form for annual examination 2015 for extraneous consideration.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26665 of 2020(3) dt.29-01-2021 2/2 entire allegation is attributable to the Headmaster or In-charge Headmasters who were finally responsible to disallow or allow such things. Petitioner was a simple clerk. Moreover, it has come in the inquiry report that one Dhananjay was perpetrating the crime in collusion with the the petitioner. Dhananjay is already dead now.

Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner, in my view, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is refused. Petitioner is directed to surrender and pray for regular bail.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- U T