Patna High CourtCR. MISC./60581/2019rejected

Chhatish Kumar Paswan @ Chhatis Kumar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2019-10-16Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60581 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2019 Thana- BEGUSARAI TOWN District- Begusarai ====================================================== Chhatish Kumar Paswan @ Chhatis Kumar Paswan, Aged about 28 years, Male, Son of Jogi Paswan, Resident of Amraur Kiratpur, P.O. Singhaul, P.S. Singhaul, District Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr. Ajeet Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 16-10-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Town P.S. Case No.89 of 2019, registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

The gist of the allegation is that the petitioner on the basis of forged certificates obtained appointment on the post of Agriculture Coordinator. When the certificates of the petitioner were verified, it was found that the certificates were fake and forged. The petitioner is said to have admitted the facts before the District Agriculture Officer who is the informant of the case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already resigned from service. One Faizuddin made allegation and the informant in collusion with Faizuddin

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60581 of 2019(2) dt.16-10-2019 2/2 lodged the case. The petitioner did not receive even a single farthing after being appointed on the post of Agriculture Coordinator but it appears that the petitioner got appointment on the basis of forged educational certificates and on verification, all the certificates produced by the petitioner were found forged and fabricated.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T