Bisheshwar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36977 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-443 Year-2015 Thana- MADHUBANI TOWN DistrictMadhubani ====================================================== Bisheshwar Singh Son of Late Krishna Kumar Singh, R/o Village- Suryapura, P.S.- Ramgadh, District- Kaimur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Viveka Nand Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Gulnar Begum, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 21-09-2022 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Nagar P.S. Case No. 443 of 2015 (G.R. No. 2814 of 2015), lodged under Sections 467, 468, 471, 406, 420, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 66(D) I.T. Act, 2008. As per the prosecution case, the appointment of one Rahul Singh was made on the basis of forgery. The Executive Officer has conducted an inquiry, in which it has been disclosed by the said candidate namely Rahul Singh that, he has completed exam on the basis of Bluetooth and for his success the entire arrangement has been made by his father, who is the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36977 of 2022(2) dt.21-09-2022 2/2 present petitioner upon payment of Rs.3,50,000/- to a broker. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He further submits that son of petitioner was removed from the service upon disclosure of aforesaid illegality. He further submits that petitioner is an old aged person of about 63 years and is in custody since 28.05.2022, having clean antecedent and charge sheet has already been filed in this case.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the present petitioner is main conspirator behind this illegality, which was accepted by the son of petitioner himself.

In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and, therefore, his bail application is hereby rejected.

Liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail after one year of framing of charge. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) ritik/- U T