Sadanand Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65109 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2017 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Sadanand Mahto S/o Late Jageshwar Mahto R/o Village - Ratan, P.S - Gogri, District - Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1 .
The State of Bihar 2.
The Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Patna, through its Superintendents Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ajay Mishra, APP For OP 2 :
Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State .
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 467, 468, 477(A), 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 3 . As per F.I.R. this petitioner, who happened to be the one of the member of appointment committee in collusion with the Mukhiya , Panchayat secretary and other members of the appointment committee , appointed one Mamta Kumari in place of Shyam Nandan , who has got more marks and against whom Shyam Nandan had moved before the Tribunal, which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65109 of 2025(2) dt.17-09-2025 2/3 has been decided in favour of him and later on, Mamta Kumari moved before the High Court, which has also been decided in favour of Shyam Nandan .
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the alleged appointment was of year 2007 and the present F.I.R has been lodged in the year 2017 for which there is no plausible explanation which itself creates doubt over the prosecution case . Petitioner was one of the member of selection committee and the decision of appointment was collective and as such , petitioner alone cannot be held responsible for the alleged illegal appointment. Petitioner claims clean antecedent. One of the co-accused persons namely Lutan Thakur who happened to be Panchayat Secretary has also been granted anticipatory bail from Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 11.03.2019 in Cr. Misc. No. 3895 of 2019.
5 . Learned counsel for the State opposed the bail petition .
6 Considering the aforesaid facts, clean antecedent of the petitioner and other circumstances of the case , in the event of arrest or surrender within eight weeks from today, let the petitioner, as named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65109 of 2025(2) dt.17-09-2025 3/3 like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional sessions Judge Vigilance Bhagalpur in connection with Vigilance Case No. 84 of 2017, subject to the conditions laid down under section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 .
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Koushik/- U T