Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32846/2026bail granted

Imtiyaz Alam v. The State Of Bihar Through The Special Vigilance Unit Patna

2026-05-13Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32846 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2026 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Imtiyaz Alam S/o Late Mustafa Jamal R/o Village - Denga Chowk, P.S - Palasi, District - Araria ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar through the Special Vigilance Unit Patna Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate :

Mr. Mayank Rai, Advocate :

Mr. Adarsh, Advocate :

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma For the SVU :

Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, Advocate :

Mr. Arvind Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026 Heard Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the Special Vigilance Unit.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 20.01.2026 in connection with Special Vigilance Unit P.S. Case No. 03 of 2026 for the offence punishable under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant had purchased a plot of land in the year 2014, bearing Khata No. 501, Khesra No. 431 in Mauza Farahi, Circle Narpatganj. The mutation of the land was completed. But some errors had occurred in his name, his father's name and the area

2/4 of land (Rakba) in the online records under Register- 02. So for rectification, he had submitted an online application, which was pending before the Revenue Karamchari. When he met Revenue Karamchari, Imtiaz Alam then he demanded bribe of Rs. 15,000/-. The complainant was not willing to give bribe, so he filed the complaint in the Vigilance. After filing of the complaint, the verification was made and the allegation was found to be true. Thereafter, trap was laid on 20.01.2026 and the accused was caught red handed while accepting the bribe amount of Rs. 15000/-.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and petitioner is a Revenue Karamchari and he has demanded Rs. 15,000/- from the informant and has been caught red handed and it has come during investigation in the CDR that the petitioner has demanded Rs. 15,000/- from the informant. It is submitted that the vigilance after investigation has submitted charge-sheet and the petitioner is in custody since 20-01-2026.

5. Learned counsel for the Vigilance has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has been arrested and pre-trap and post-trap memorandum suggest

3/4 that the recovered note belongs to the Vigilance Unit and recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner. Apart from that petitioner has antecedent of one case other than the present case but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in the pending matter.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, 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 Special Judge, Vigilance, Patna in connection with Special Case No. 13 of 2026, arising out of Special Vigilance Unit P.S. Case No. 03 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

4/4 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 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) Gaurav Sinha/- U T