Jitendra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar Through The Special Vigilance Unit, Patna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26607 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2025 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Jitendra Prasad S/o Jai Ram Prasad R/o Village and Post - Kushumbha, P.S. - Sheikhpura, Dist. - Sheikhpura, The then Secretary, Daulatpur Panchayat, Ara Sadar, Dist. - Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar Through the Special Vigilance Unit, Patna Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Mayank Raj, Advocate For the SVU :
Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, Law Officer ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-04-2026 Heard Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the Special Vigilance Unit.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 31.12.2025 in connection with Special Case No. 12 of 2026 arising out of SVU Case No. 28 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 30.12.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 7of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner being the Panchayat Secretary was found demanding Rs. 10,000/- as bribe for issuing birth certificate.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26607 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026 2/3 implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He further submits that the petitioner is the Panchayat Secretary and as per the allegation, the petitioner has demanded Rs. 10,000/- bribe for issuing birth certificate from the informant and while accepting the bribe he was caught red handed. He further submits that the petitioner has not demanded any bribe from the informant. In fact, the informant has planted the entire story. He further submits that the Vigilance has submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 31.12.2025.
5. The learned counsel for the Vigilance has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. 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 Special Judge, Vigilance, Patna in connection with Special Case No. 12 of 2026 arising out of SVU Case No. 28 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26607 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026 3/3 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. ii. 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.
iii. 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 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