Dr. Dharmendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58921 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2024 Thana- JAKKANPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Dr. Dharmendra Kumar S/o Sri Braj Kishore Prasad R/o Rajni Complex, Mithapur, Sabzi Mandi, P.S.- Jakkanpur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Ritesh Kumar @ Sonu S/o Raj Kumar Singh R/o Asha Sadan, Wachaspati Colony, Near Sandalpur Railway Line, Kumhrar, P.S.- Bahadurpur, DisttPatna, at present Pirbahore Police Compound, Ashok Rajpath, Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Advocate Ms. Shubhra, Advocate Mr. Sanjay Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Dineshwar Tiwary, Advocate Mr. Raja Ram Rai, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges that his family has good relations with father of the petitioner, namely, Braj Kishore Prasad, further his

2/4 mother often used to visit the house of the petitioner, next alleges that during course of conversation, Braj Kishore Prasad inquired about the informant from his mother, Asha, who disclosed that he is preparing for BPSC exams, on which Braj Kishore Prasad asked her to meet the petitioner and his wife, who manage and does setting in BPSC, accordingly his mother met the petitioner and his wife and disclosed that informant has appeared in 68th BPSC examination, accordingly they asked for informant's admit card and said that the result will be in informant's favor and asked his mother to inform the informant that he should keep meeting them every 3-4 days, the informant accordingly started meeting them, next alleges that BPSC declared the result of 68th BPSC examination, but the name of the informant did not figure in the merit list, on query, the petitioner disclosed that without money no work is done and demanded Rs.

40 lakhs in advance with promise to pay rest Rs. 35 lakhs after the result is declared, further on 11-05-2023, the petitioner informed that this time the result is not possible, but arrange Rs. 40 lakhs in the next exam, as in the next exam the result is assured, accordingly on 23-08-2023, i.e., prior to commencement of 69th BPSC exam, an amount of Rs.

3/4 residence, further when the result of 69th BPSC exam was published, the name of the informant did not figure in the merit list, accordingly the informant asked the petitioner to return the amount, the petitioner on 18-12-2023 gave a cheque of Rs. 25 lakhs and promised to return Rs. 15 lakhs later, the cheque was presented for encashment and the same bounced and the bank informed that the signature on the cheque is forged, thus alleges that the petitioner, with a view to misappropriate his money, deliberately issued a cheque with forged signature.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that in sum and substance, the allegation is that informant had given Rs. 40 Lakhs in cash to the petitioner for getting a desired result in the 69th BPSC examination. It is further submitted that as per the allegation, the informant accepts that he had sought backdoor appointment on strength of money which in itself is an illegality.

5. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that he has instructions not to oppose the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner.

4/4

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Jakkanpur P.S. Case No. 39 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.

7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T