Patna High CourtCR. MISC./62546/2019dismissed

Ranjeet Kumar v. The Union Of India Through The S. P. Central Bureau Of Investigation, A.C.B. Patna.

2019-11-16Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62546 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2013 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== RANJEET KUMAR Son of Chandra Bhushan Prasad Singh Resident of Village - Gawpur, P.S.- Ujiyarpur, Distt - Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE S. P. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, A.C.B. PATNA. Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vasudeo Ram For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bipin Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-11-2019 Petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with R.C. Case No. 04(A) of 2013, corresponding to T.R. No. 27 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. As per FIR petitioner got appointed as Gramin Dak Sewak on the basis of fake certificate issued by Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he has been appointed on contractual post and other coaccused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 4.4.2019 passed in Cr.Misc.No. 17123 of 2019. On the other hand, learned counsel for CBI has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62546 of 2019(3) dt.16-11-2019 2/2 ground that during investigation it is found that petitioner by using mark sheet of one Rajnish Kumar got appointed and further prayer for anticipatory bail of other co-accused persons have been rejected by this Court by order dated 25.8.2018 passed in Cr.Misc.No. 48444 of 2018 and by order dated 29.8.2018 passed in Cr.Misc.No. 49757 of 2018. In view of above facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, if petitioner surrenders and prays for regular bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit, without being prejudiced by this order and, if possible, to be disposed of on the same day.

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/- U T