Rajesh Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37621 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2025 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani ====================================================== Rajesh Kumar Verma S/O Gereshwar Narain Verma @ Girishwar Verma @ Girishwar Narayan Verma Dubey R/O Village- Alampur, Post OfficeGadasisami, P.S- Bethan, Distt.- Samastipur. Presently residing at Stadium Road, Hanuman Nagar Colony, Madhubani, P.S- Madhubani, Distt.- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna. Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Hansraj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Mishra, A.P.P.

Mr. Arvind Kumar, Spl.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ajay Mishra, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned Spl.P.P. appearing on behalf of the Vigilance.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that petitioner was appointed as a teacher based on forged and fabricated certificate.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37621 of 2025(2) dt.18-06-2025 2/2 informant. It is further submitted that prior to instituting the instant FIR, no explanation was sought from the petitioner. It is next submitted that had an opportunity been given to the petitioner to explain his side of the case perhaps the instant FIR would not have been instituted. It is also submitted that service of the petitioner stands terminated.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned Spl.P.P. appearing on behalf of the Vigilance opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T