Kumari Renu Sinha @ Renu Singh v. The Central Bureau Of Investigation Through Superintendent Of Police CBI/ Acb, Patna.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68923 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2018 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Patna ====================================================== KUMARI RENU SINHA @ RENU SINGH W/O SRI SURENDRA KUMAR Resident of 110 (Reghuna), House of Surendra Kumar, Village Nijhra, P.S.- Singori, District- Patna at present Raghunath Tola Anishabad, P.S.- Gardanibagh, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CBI/ ACB, PATNA. Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Vaishnavi Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Nivedita Nirvikar, Adv.

For C.B.I. : Mr. Avanish Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Ambar Narayan, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-04-2023 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Avanish Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Central Bureau of Investigation.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 120(B), 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 of the Indian Penal Code but the prosecution agency after investigation submitted the charge sheet under Section 120(B) read with Sections 201, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with Sections 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

2/4 According to prosecution case, the allegation has been made that there were several irregularities in appointment of primary teacher under Mudika Panchayat and there is specific allegation against the petitioner that she was appointed in a category to which she does not belong and that too being a member of appointment Committee.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and she has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. against the petitioner that she herself selected the selection process of Panchayat teacher in which she was also one of the members of the committee. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact the petitioner had no knowledge that she has not annexed any certificate of the visually handicapped with the application form and the petitioner has already resigned from the post of the Panchayat teacher in question and the similarly situated coaccused namely, Lalan Prasad has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 20.01.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 2264 of 2020, co-accused namely, Arvind Kumar Yadav has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 24.03.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No.31903 of 2021, co-accused namely, Kanchan

3/4 Kumari has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 03.02.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No.18203 of 2021, co-accused persons namely, Md. Anwar Ali, Navin Kumar Singh @ Seraj Ahmad, Tabassum @ Tabassum Bano, Zabad Tabassum have been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 10.01.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9154 of 2021 and several other coaccused persons have also been granted anticipatory bail by the different co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the Central Bureau of Investigation, after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 26.08.2022.

The learned counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, CBI-II, Patna, in connection with R.C. Case No.05(A) of 2018 (Special Case No. 08/2018), subject to the following conditions:-

1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

4/4 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) amit/- U T