Rinki Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48880 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-579 Year-2021 Thana- MOHANIYA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Rinki Kumari D/o Chhote Lal Prasad, W/o Mahashanka Raj R/o villageDevadhiya, P.S.- Rajpur, District- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 14-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Vigilance as well as learned A.P.P. for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. According to the prosecution case, the petitioner was appointed as Block Teacher and on verification it was found that the mark sheet submitted by the petitioner is fake. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that pursuant

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48880 of 2022(3) dt.14-12-2022 2/3 to the order passed in 18.12.2021, the present F.I.R. is instituted against the petitioner and the similarly situated person. He further submits that in fact, the petitioner was selected for the post of Block Teacher in the year 2015 and he further submits that the petitioner has received the appointment letter dated 29.03.2015 but she never joined the post in question, so there is no question of resignation from the post as mentioned in the F.I.R. He further submits that the present F.I.R. is instituted against the petitioner only on the basis of the wrong information furnished by the Department.

The learned counsel for the Vigilance has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Mohania P.S. Case No. 579 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48880 of 2022(3) dt.14-12-2022 3/3

1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T