Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80712 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2024 Thana- JOGSAR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Santosh Kumar S/O Sri Pradeep Sah Resident of Chowk Shikarpur, Lal Imli Mota Kuan, Patna City, P.O- Begampur, P.S- Chowk, District- Patna, Presently posted as Clerk at District Registry Office, Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumar Pankaj, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 09-12-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Jogsar P.S. Case No. 58 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 421, 423, 467, 468, 469, 471, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per FIR, the original document of the land belonging to Basudeo Pd. Singh was replaced with a forged document in the registry office. During investigation, it came to light that the original document had indeed gone missing and a fake document was created with different names. It is further alleged that the employees of the record room (Registry Office) including this petitioner along with an unknown were found

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80712 of 2024(2) dt.09-12-2024 2/3 involved in the forgery.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. No such occurrence as alleged has ever taken place. He has falsely been implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is totally false and based on concocted facts. The work of maintaining the original record was not done by the petitioner, who was a clerk at the relevant time in office in question rather the same was being looked after under the record room by in-charge (Record Keeper) and other staff like MTS. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner was not involved in the digitization process of records of registry office and he has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application. Nothing specific has been attributed against him. It is further submitted that similarly situated co-accused has been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Cr. Misc. No. 69095 of 2024 vide order dated 23.10.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80712 of 2024(2) dt.09-12-2024 3/3 of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seeks regular bail, the learned Court below shall pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T