Patna High CourtCR. MISC./84451/2025bail granted

Karan Verma v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-19Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84451 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1202 Year-2024 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Karan Verma S/o Late Pramod Kumar Verma R/o Road No. 3/4, Chitrakut Nagar, Takiapar, P.S.- Danapur, Distt.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Shaheen Begum, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-01-2026 Heard Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Shaheen Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 26.09.2025 in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 1202 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 30.11.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, it is alleged by the informant who is District & Additional Sessions Judge 3rd Danapur that he was in charge of Additional Sessions Judge 7th Danapur and this petitioner being the bench clerk has manipulated the order by making his forged signature and granted bail to the accused persons.

2/4

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioner was posted as bench clerk cum office clerk in Danapur Judgeship in the Court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge 7th Danapur and he has joined his services in the year 2011 and was discharging his duties without any complaint having clean service records.

When the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge 7th was in training then the Additional District & Sessions Judge 3rd Danapur was in charge of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge 7th Danapur and the petitioner has no role in the present occurrence and the petitioner was the custodian of the record but he has not manipulated the sign of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge 3rd Danapur and the petitioner has been made accused in this case merely on the basis of suspicion. The petitioner has annexed different orders of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge 3rd Danapur which suggest that the sign of the presiding officer is same. The petitioner is in custody since 26.09.2025.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has

3/4 vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has not signed on behalf of the presiding officer in question, 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 ACJM-I, Danapur in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 1202 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. 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.

iii. 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 his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

4/4 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) Vanisha/- U T