Mini Kumari v. The State Of Bihar Through The Vigilence Department Bihar, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65886 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2017 Thana- ISUAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== MINI KUMARI Wife of Late Bhuneshwar Ojha D/o Raghaw Sharma Resident of Village-Kumhalia, P.S.-Isuapur, District-Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE VIGILENCE DEPARTMENT BIHAR, PATNA ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dr. Shashi Shekhar Kishore For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anjani Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 06-11-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in Isuapur P.S. case No. 229/2017 registered under Section 419, 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 201, 120B of the IPC.

The gist of the allegation against the petitioner is that during the course of enquiry by the Vigilance Department it was found that petitioner got appointment on the basis of forged Intermediate marks- sheet. The petitioner submitted marks-sheet showing that she obtained 662 marks out of 900 marks but on verification it transpired that petitioner got only 545 marks out of 900 marks.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prayer of petitioner for anticipatory bail was rejected by order dated 20.07.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 42400 of 2018 but thereafter two similarly situated accused persons, namely, Poonam Kumari and Pragya Priyadarshini were granted anticipatory bail by coordinate benches of this court vide order

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65886 of 2019(2) dt.06-11-2019 2/2 dated 09.05.2019 and 10.05.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 31093 of 2019 and 46242 of 2018 and on this ground the petitioner moved this court for grant of anticipatory bail. It appears from the orders passed in Cr. Misc. No. 31093 of 2019 and 46242 of 2018 that they were granted anticipatory bail on 09.05.2019 and 10.05.2019 respectively and the prayer of petitioner for anticipatory bail was rejected on 20.07.2018 but this order was not produced before the coordinate benches. It is admitted fact that petitioner produced forged marks-sheet of Intermediate claiming that she obtained 662 marks out of 900 marks and got appointment on the post of teacher but in fact on verification it was found that petitioner obtained only 545 marks out of 900 marks. It was intentional manipulation in the marks-sheet by the petitioner for getting appointment.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T