Patna High CourtCR. MISC./53440/2025bail rejected

Sheoji Prasad Singh @ Shivji Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-18Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53440 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2016 Thana- AGION (GARHANI) District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Sheoji Prasad Singh @ Shivji Prasad Singh S/O Shivdeep Singh The Then Panchayat Sachiv Gram Panchayat Badhaura(G), Bhojpur, Present R/o Mohalla- Vishnunagar, Bazar Samiti, Ara, P.S.- Ara Nawada, Dist.- Bhojpur, Present Add. Baruna, P.S.- Baruna ,Dist- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aditya Nath Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madan Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-08-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Agiaon (G) P.S. Case No.38/2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of three cases and the informant alleges that on direction of the D.E.O. the instant FIR was instituted against the petitioner, who is Panchayat Sachiv with an allegation that he did not submit folder of appointed teacher by 15.02.2016.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53440 of 2025(2) dt.18-08-2025 2/2 absolutely does not stand to reason that why a criminal case came to be instituted against the petitioner for the offence alleged, the authorities could have proceeded against the petitioner departmentally.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the case is of the year 2016 and the petitioner at his leisure has moved in the year 2025 when process under Section 82-83 Cr.P.C. has been issued.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP Madan Kumar, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T