Vijendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58453 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2022 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== VIJENDRA KUMAR SON OF BALESHWAR SAH R/O VILLAGESHERPUR VIDAYAPATI NAGAR, P.S.- VIDYAPATI NAGAR, DISTRICTSAMASTIPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jay Ram Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-01-2023 Heard the parties.

The petitioner apprehend his arrest in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No.169 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 66(B)(D) of I.T. Act. The allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith other co-accused persons are involved in the practice of impersonation i.e. making some other scholar candidate seat in the candidate's place in competitive examination by committing forgery by use of fabricated digital records. It is further alleged several forged document and other electronic articles alongwith Rs.18,78,000/- has been seized by the raiding team. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58453 of 2022(2) dt.03-01-2023 2/2 petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is no specific overt act against the petitioner. The name of the petitioner transpired in the present case only on the basis of confessional statement of apprehended co-accused persons. He further submits that no witnesses have supported the prosecution story against the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner is also involved in the present case.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T