Bhogendra Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30163 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2025 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Bhogendra Jha S/O Late Ramchandra Jha R/O Ward No. 11 Village- Sursand Purvi, P.S. and P.O.- Sursand, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Patna 2.

The Bihar State, Vigilance Department through the Superintendent of Police Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr.Amit Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Anant Kumar 1, APP For the Vigilance :

Mr.Arvind Kumar, S.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-07-2025 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned Special P.P. for the Bihar State Vigilance Department and Mr. Anant Kumar 1, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences under Section 7(A) of P.C. Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant had submitted an application alleging therein that he had applied for mutation of his six decimal land, however one Bhogendra Jha (petitioner) had been demanding Rs. 54,000/- for mutating his name. It is further alleged that on such written report, a trap was laid and after following all the procedures the petitioner was

2/4 apprehended along with Rs. 51,000/- which was given to him by the informant in pursuance to the pre-trap memorandum.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case on the ground of demanding illegal gratification for passing mutation orders in favour of the informant. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is a Karamchari-cum-incharge Circle Inspector, Pupri and he had to only submit a report to the concerned authority. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner had pointed out some defects after carrying out full inquiry and has submitted a report and thereafter he has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel next submits that no such recovery as alleged has been made and the pre and post trap memorandums and are all table work done by the Vigilance in connivance with the informant. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and is in custody since 28.01.2025.

5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the Vigilance Department has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was caught red-handed with the currency notes which were prepared as per the pre-trap memorandum and the same were subsequently found in his possession. Learned Spl. P.P.

3/4 next submits that petitioner was instrumental in withholding the mutation of the informant and as such trap was laid and the petitioner fell into the trap and had even accepted his guilt.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the period of custody of the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Vigilance Case No. 04/2025 (Special Case No. 02/2025) subject to the conditions :- a. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.

b. The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.

c. In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

d. The Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has

4/4 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 aforementioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) tusharika/- U T