Vidya Bhushan Singh @ Vidhya Bhusham Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10697 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -269 Year- 2016 Thana -GAURICHAK District- PATNA ====================================================== Vidya Bhushan Singh @ Vidhya Bhusham Singh, son of late Rajeshwar Prasad Singh, resident of Mainpura Pragati Nagar, P.S. - Danapur, District - Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Neerad Parashar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 17-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 269 of 2016 instituted for the offence under Sections 467, 468, 471, 406, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per written report, on the complaint filed by 10 persons, the Block Development Officer, Punpun, along with Prakhand Pramukh inspected the office and found the Halka Karamchari Vidya Bhushan Singh (petitioner) absent and the office was run by one Naresh Bhagat. Naresh Bhagat was also found in possession of key of the office, relevant official documents such as register-2, revenue receipt etc. The plain receipts bearing signatures of the petitioner were also found from which it appears that after mentioning the description of the land,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10697 of 2017 (2) dt.17-03-2017 2/2 the same were given to the people by said Naresh Bhagat. It has also been complained before the Block Development Officer during inspection by one Amit Kumar that after cutting the name of his grand-father late Ramdeo Singh, the name of Chandradeo Singh was inserted in register-2.

In this manner, there is serious allegation against the petitioner as mentioned in the written report. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

The petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail.

(Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T