Patna High CourtCR. MISC./33195/2026bail granted

Ashok Kumar Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar Through Vigilance Investigation Bureau Patna, Bihar

2026-05-15Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33195 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2026 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Ashok Kumar Choudhary S/o Late Sipahi Choudhary (U.D.C Mining Department, Kishanganj) R/o Village - Banboriya @ Banbariya, P.S - Sikarpur, District - West Champaran At Present R/o - Ward no. 4, Rajendra Nagar Purani Gajri, P.S - Town Thana, Batiya @ Bettiah, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The state of Bihar through Vigilance Investigation Bureau Patna, Bihar Patna Bihar 2.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumar Amit, Advocate Mr. Kunal Ishwar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar, SPP, Vigilance ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2026 Heard Mr. Kumar Amit, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the Vigilance.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 18.02.2026 in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 20 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 16.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 7(a), 7(c) and 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 61(2) of the BNS, 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner has demanded Rs. 10,000 as a bribe from the informant for release of his vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33195 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026 2/3 petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. As per the allegation, the petitioner has demanded as bribe from the informant for release of vehicle in informant's favour. He further submits that the petitioner is not a competent person to release the vehicle in question in favour of the informant. The informant was caught red handed by the vigilance team and Rs. 8,000/- has been recovered from his possession. He further submits that the Vigilance have submitted the charge sheet on 14.04.2026 against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 18.02.2026.

5. The learned Special Public Prosecutor for the Vigilance has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was arrested along with Rs. 8,000/- which was matched with the pre-trap and posttrap memorandum but fairly submits that the charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33195 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026 3/3 the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge (Vigilance), Bhagalpur in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 20 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 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) Vanisha/- U T