Punam Kumari v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.50057 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -28 Year- 2006 Thana -C.B.I CASE District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Punam Kumari, wife of Murari Singh, Daughter of Ramanand Pd. Sahi, resident of Village- Anant Kamtaul, P.S. Kudhani, District- Muzaffarpur, at present posted as a teacher in Kendriya Vidyalaya, Muzaffarpur, P.S.- Kazi Mohammadpur, District:-Muzaffarpur.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Yugal Kishore For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-12-2016 Heard Sri Yugal Kishore, learned counsel for the petitioner , Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad , learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as Sri Amaresh Kumar, learned Assisting Counsel to Sri Rama Kant Sharma, learned Senior Law Officer (Vigilance).
The sole petitioner, apprehending her arrest in Vigilance P.S. Case No. 28 of 2006 corresponding to Special Case No. 23 of 2006 registered for the offence under Section 465, 466, 468, 471, 201/ 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1)(D) of the Prevention of Corruption Act has prayed for grant of bail in the event of arrest or surrender. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50057 of 2016 (4) dt.19-12-2016 2/3 that earlier prior to filing of the present F.I.R. petitioner had filed a complaint against the main accused of the present case relating to grant of disablement certificate in respect of another leg however he has not disputed the fact that after investigation in this case charge sheet was submitted in April, 2015 itself and cognizance order has also been passed. Besides this, it is also not in dispute that the two accused doctors who were alleged for issuance of forged disablement certificate in favour of the petitioner were arrested earlier itself. Initially charge sheet was submitted and thereafter supplementary charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner and his name has appeared in column no. 11 of the charge sheet.
Keeping in view the fact that there is allegation that petitioner was the beneficiary of the forged certificate as well as the fact that after submission of charge sheet cognizance order has already been passed , the court is of the opinion that anticipatory bail petition may not be entertained .
The petition stands disposed of .
It is made clear that if within a period of six weeks from today, petitioner appears before the court below and makes a prayer for regular bail , the learned court below without being prejudiced with this order may examine the same and pass
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50057 of 2016 (4) dt.19-12-2016 3/3 appropriate order in accordance with law preferably on the same day.
(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U T