Veena Devi v. The State Of Bihar Through The Director General Of Police, Vigilance, Bihar, Patna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77613 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2024 Thana- BENIPATTI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Veena Devi W/o- Sanjay Mukhiya Resident of Village- Chholikadha, P.S.- Benipatti, Dist- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Vigilance, Bihar, Patna Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Saurav Anand, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arvind Kumar, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 20-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Benipatti P.S. Case No. 153 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 13(2), 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
3. Allegedly, all the FIR named accused persons including the petitioner are said to have committed irregularity and illegality in the appointment of Primary Teacher during the financial year 2008-10.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. No
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77613 of 2024(2) dt.20-11-2024 2/3 such occurrence as alleged has ever taken place. She 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. At the relevant time, petitioner was Mukhiya, but she being an illiterate lady never presided any meeting of appointment. The custodian of the documents was the then Panchayat Secretary and she being Mukhiya was mere a signatory upon the proceeding. The real fact of the matter is that the then Panchayat Secretary had manipulated the signature of the petitioner and issued the appointment letter being the authority of the Government. Petitioner has no role in the alleged irregularity.
It is further submitted that after 16 years of appointment, the present FIR has been lodged and tenure of the petitioner as Mukhiya of the Gram Panchayat has already been expired in the year 2012. It is further submitted that three teachers against whom there is specific allegation of manipulation in the documents have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Court below itself. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77613 of 2024(2) dt.20-11-2024 3/3 petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail 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 considering the fact that three teachers against whom there is specific allegation have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Court below itself.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T