Manoj Kumar Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.34614 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -159 Year- 2016 Thana -PIRBAHOR District- PATNA ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar S/o- Sri Rajeshwar Singh, Resident of - Opposite Murty Makan South gali, Mainpura P.S.- Patliputra, District-Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== With Criminal Miscellaneous No.37187 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -159 Year- 2016 Thana -PIRBAHOR District- PATNA ====================================================== Uma Shanker Prasad Son of Late Ram Briksh Rai, Resident of VillageSaidpur, Muradpur, P.S- Salimpur, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== With Criminal Miscellaneous No.37246 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -159 Year- 2016 Thana -PIRBAHOR District- PATNA ====================================================== Manoj Kumar Gupta son of Shubhash Prasad Gupta, resident of villagePunpun Bazar, P.S.- Punpun, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In Cr.Misc. No.34614 of 2016) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Shankar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, APP (In Cr.Misc. No.37187 of 2016) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jai Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dinesh Singh, APP (In Cr.Misc. No.37246 of 2016) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pathak, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Renuka Ratnakar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34614 of 2016 (4) dt.03-10-2016 2/3 The petitioners seek bail in a case instituted for the offences under Sections 467, 468, 471, 472, 420 and 120(B) of the I.P.C.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the alleged date and time of occurrence the informant got information that some persons were assembled near western gage of Civil Court, Sadar, Patna to prepare forged document and when he and other police force reached there and seeing the police team the accused persons began to flee but they were caught by the police force. They disclosed their names as the petitioners. On search several fake driving licence and I.D. cards have been recovered from the possession of the petitioners.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are in custody since 12.6.2016 and the charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. The petitioners have got no criminal antecedents except for petitioner Uma Shanker Prasad. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioners. As per the allegation, from the possession of petitioner Mukesh Kumar two fake driving licence is said to have been recovered, from the possession of petitioner Uma Shanker Prasad six forged I.D. cards along with fake land rent receipts were recovered and from the possession of petitioner

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34614 of 2016 (4) dt.03-10-2016 3/3 Manoj Kumar Gupta two fake driving licence is said to have been recovered. It has further been submitted that the genuineness of the documents has not been verified by the Investigating Officer. The petitioners are Advocate's Clerks at Patna District Court. On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is directed that the petitioners above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna in connection with Pirbahore P.S. case No.159 of 2016 (G.R. No.3620 of 2016).

If the petitioners are found involved in a similar case in future, the court below will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioners.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T