Savita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45711 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2020 Thana- RAJPUR District- Buxar ====================================================== SAVITA KUMARI D/o Ram Singhasan Singh and W/o Sivilsarjan Singh Resident of Village- Jamauli, P.S.- Rajpur, District- Buxar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha, Advocate For the Vigilance :
Mr. Arvind Kumar, Spl. P.P.
For the State :
Mr. Ajay Mishra, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-03-2022 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Let the defect(s) be removed within two weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course. Petitioner, who is in custody since 01.04.2021, seeks regular bail in connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No. 106 of 2020 registered for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 471, 468 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution story in brief is that the petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Teacher on the basis of forged certificate.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and she has falsely been implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, the petitioner was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45711 of 2021(3) dt.22-03-2022 2/3 appointed on the post of Shiksha Mitra and at the time of her appointment, all the relevant documents produced by her have thoroughly been examined and verified by the concerned authorities. But, unfortunately, on re-verification in the light of order passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 15459 of 2014, the documents produced at the time of appointment of the petitioner are found to have been forged and fabricated and on that ground the petitioner has been dismissed from her services. Even after her dismissal from service for the alleged offence, she is being prosecuted in this case and she is rotting in judicial custody since 01.04.2021. He further submits that other coaccused persons against whom similar allegation has been made have already been released on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this court and the petitioner is also entitled to be released on bail on any condition imposed by this Court.
Learned Special P.P., Vigilance, has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. He submits that chargesheet has not been submitted in the present case and as such there is every likelihood of tampering the evidence or influencing the witnesses.
Considering the nature of allegation made in the F.I.R. and the other co-accused persons against whom similar
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45711 of 2021(3) dt.22-03-2022 3/3 allegation has been made have already been enlarged on bail as informed by the Special P.P., Vigilance and there is no possibility of trial being concluded in near future, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. VI, Buxar in connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No. 106 of 2020 subject to the following conditions: (i) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court concerned.
(ii) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court. (iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. (iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence, after his release on bail, the trial Court shall take steps to cancel his bail bond.
(Purnendu Singh, J) Niraj/- U T