Mukesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28057 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2017 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna ====================================================== MUKESH KUMAR Son of Birendra Singh Resident of Vishunpura, P.S.- Jamo Bazar, District- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sarvan Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Humayau Ahmad Khan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 24-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Cod.

The prosecution case as per the written report of the informant, in brief, is that on 18.01.2017 the informant Dheeraj Kumar, an official of Tata Consultancy Services as Operation Executive has submitted his written report to the S.H.O. Bihta P.S. in which he has stated that he was appointed as Centre Superintendent of N.S.I.T. Bihta centre and examination of 2nd shift of R.R.B. NTPC was going on. The informant has further alleged that in course of checking and verify of admit card several persons were caught red handed, who were appearing in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28057 of 2019(3) dt.24-07-2019 2/3 the examination in place of genuine candidates by using unfair means in connivance with each other. The informant has further alleged that the apprehended persons confessed their collusion and fault.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent, committed no offence and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that on the date of examination when the petitioner approached the examination centre he was asked to produce the I.D. proof. He further submits that when he produced his I.D. then the officials at examination centre did not permit him to enter into the premises on the ground that his name is different from admit card. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that another coaccused Kumud Kumar @ Kumud Ranjan has been granted the bail by the learned court below itself.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory 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 A.C.J.M.-1st, Danapur, Patna in connection with Bihta

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28057 of 2019(3) dt.24-07-2019 3/3 Police Station Case No. 17 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as condition that the petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation/trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T