Pankaj Kumar v. The Union Of India Through C. B. I.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45694 of 2018 ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar, Son of Satyendra Kumar @ Satyendra Kumar Singh, Resident of Village- Sonaul Mahoday, P.S.- Majorganj, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The Union of India through C. B. I.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate For the C.B.I. : Mr. Sanjay Kumar (Sc,CBI) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 10-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Special Case No. 04 of 2013 arising out of C.B.I./ACB/R.C. Case No.3(A) of 2013 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner is of obtaining the job of Gramin Dak Sewak on the forged certificate. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that certificate of the petitioner is genuine and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Further submission is that in similar situated another R.C. Case, one co-accused has been granted bail by this Court.

Heard learned Standing Counsel for C.B.I., who opposed the prayer for bail stating that the certificate of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45694 of 2018 (3) dt.10-08-2018 2/2 petitioner was sent for verification and after verification, it was found forged and there was manipulation in the mark sheet and furthermore, prayer for some other accused persons has been rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 16.12.2015 in Cr. Misc. No. 43596 of 2015 and other analogous cases.

Having heard both sides and in the facts and circumstances that the certificate of the petitioner has already been enquired into by the C.B.I. and the same has been found forged, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, rather petitioner to surrender and make prayer for regular bail, which will be considered without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) N.H./- Sanjeev U T