Raushan Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar Through Vigilance
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39241 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2025 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Raushan Kumar Singh, S/O Sri Rajendra Singh, Resident of villageMadanpur, P.S- Avtar Nagar, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar through Vigilance Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kr. Thakur, Advoate Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate MR. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate For the Vigilance Deptt. :
Mr. Anil Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 03-09-2025 Heard Mr. Ajay Kr. Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Singh, learned counsel for the Vigilance Department.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 06 of 2025 instituted for the offence under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner was caught red handed receiving Rs. 75,000/- as bribe from a complainant whom he has promised to favour.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in this case charge-sheet has been filed and petitioner is in custody since 12.02.2025. He is having no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP appearing for the Vigilance Department
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39241 of 2025(3) dt.03-09-2025 2/2 has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioner and has submitted that the petitioner was caught red handed and videography of the seizure was also made. It has also been submitted that in the F.I.R. itself it has come that the petitioner was in habit of taking bribe from each and every person and he himself being the law enforcing authority has indulged into this.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.
7. However, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after incarceration of one year.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T