Abhilasha Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61892 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2025 Thana- AIRPORT District- Patna ====================================================== Abhilasha Raj D/o Krishnajay Kumar R/o Village - Saraiya, P.S - Goradih, District - Bhagalpur, A/P Kurji Pul, gate no. 77, P.S - Digha, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-09-2025 Heard Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Hawai Adda P.S. Case No. 57 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 22.03.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 336(4), 340(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that she got service for the post of Assistant Engineer on the basis of forged certificates.

4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and she has been falsely

2/4 implicated in the present case. As per allegation in the F.I.R., the petitioner has got the job in question after submitting the forged certificate. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that when the petitioner has come to know about the allegation against her she has tendered her resignation before the competent authority but the competent authority has refused to accept the resignation of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner has again put her resignation before the authority concerned and the resignation was accepted on 29.02.2025. Thereafter, as per direction of the competent authority, the petitioner has deposited Rs. 3,52,500/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Two Thousand and Five Hundred) as she has received as a salary before the authority concerned. Learned Senior counsel further submits that although the petitioner has deposited the certificate which she has received from the competent Board/University but at the time of due verification it was found that the certificate of the petitioner was forged.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner knowing the fact she has deposited the forged certificate for obtaining the job in question but fairly submits from the pleadings of the bail petition that the petitioner has deposited

3/4 Rs. 3,52,500/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Two Thousand and Five Hundred) by way of demand draft in favour of CMD, BPBCC, Patna dated 25.03.2025.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, 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/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Patna in connection with Hawai Adda P.S. Case No. 57 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :-

(1) Learned Court below is directed to verify the genuineness that whether the petitioner has deposited Rs. 3,52,500/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Two Thousand and Five Hundred) on 25.03.2025 by way of demand draft in favour of CMD, BPBCC, Patna or not.

(2) 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

4/4 on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(4) 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 her 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) Ibrar//- U T