Radheshyam Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30752 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-535 Year-2024 Thana- AURANGABAD TOWN DistrictAurangabad ====================================================== Radheshyam Singh S/O Sitaram Singh R/O Village- Narwar, P.S- Rohtas, Distt.- Rohtas at Sasaram.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mukul Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025 Heard Learned counsel for the petitioner and Learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No. 535 of 2024 lodged on 21.07.2024, for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with section 10 of the Bihar Conduct of Examination Act, 1981, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad.

3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against two named accused persons including the present petitioner. It has been alleged in the FIR that co-accused Akhilesh Kumar was found writing the competitive examination of Bihar Public Service Commission (TRE-03) in place of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30752 of 2025(2) dt.15-05-2025 2/2 submits that he has falsely been implicated in this case and coaccused Akhilesh Kumar was arrested at the time of occurrence with recovery of forged and fabricated admit card and petitioner has no concern with the said accused. Counsel further submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is the kingpin and from the rejection order, it has come that as per para 5 of the case diary, co-accused Akhilesh Kumar has stated that petitioner has paid him some money to appear in the competitive examination in his place.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T