Munna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29098 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-324 Year-2024 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Munna Kumar, Son of Ramjanam Mahto, Village -Parshurampur, P.S.- Pipra District -East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

A.D.G.P. Vigilance Department, Bihar, Patna.

... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Parties :

Mr. Ajay Mishra, APP Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 14-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the Vigilance Department.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 324 of 2024, dated.01.10.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per allegation, on the basis of forged eligibility certificate, the petitioner got appointed as Block Teacher, in the Middle School, Block Kalyanpur in the year 2011. The petitioner had produced certificate that he had passed the B.E.T.E.T. held in 2011, whereas after verification, the same

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29098 of 2025(2) dt.14-05-2025 2/3 was found to be forged.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that no notice has been given prior to lodging of this FIR and he has been already terminated on the basis of such allegation and he cannot be doubly punished by way of filing the present case. He further submits that in similar circumstances many persons have got anticipatory bail.

5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.

6. It has further been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

7. However, learned counsel for the vigilance department vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioner for bail submitting that termination is a civil consequence of his action and the alleged facts and circumstances may have civil as well as criminal consequences. This criminal proceeding has been started on the basis of criminal law and has nothing to do with the civil law. Moreover, some time provided for voluntary surrender of the appointment, the petitioner has not availed that period of amnesty. Hence, he was subsequently terminated and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29098 of 2025(2) dt.14-05-2025 3/3 offence of forgery is already committed as per the facts and circumstances of the case. The petitioner deserve no leniency in view of the fact that such crime has potential to destroy the whole education system of the state and depriving the eligible persons of appointment.

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

9. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

(Jitendra Kumar, J.) Chandan/- U T