← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30648/2026bail granted

Ritesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2026-05-12Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30648 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2026 Thana- GARDANIBAG District- Patna ====================================================== Ritesh Singh S/O Sri Bhagelu Singh Yadav @ Bhagelu Singh Resident of village- Tajpur Kurra P.S. -Dildar Nagar, District- Gazipur UP ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Devi Das Srivastava, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-05-2026 Heard Mr. Devi Das Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary corrections in paragraph no. 2 of the supplementary affidavit during course of the day.

3. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 20.02.2026 in connection with Gardanibagh P.S. Case No. 149 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 19.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 112(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 10 &11 of the Bihar Public Examinations (Prevention of unfair means) Act, 2024.

4. According to prosecution case, one Dhananjay

2/4 Kumar appeared in place of the petitioner as candidate in the written examination with connivance of the employees of the centers taking photograph and bio-metric by unfair means and secured the result for him.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been 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 photograph of this petitioner does not match with the person who appeared to give examination and on the ground of this the co-accused was apprehended and he has confessed that he is sitting in the examination in place of petitioner and thereafter, the petitioner has also confessed his guilt in the present occurrence. He further submits that except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 20.02.2026.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

3/4

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the petitioner has clean antecedent and nothing has come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence, 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 ACJM-13, Patna in connection with Gardanibagh P.S. Case No. 149 of 2026, 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 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

4/4 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