Sanjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87060 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2025 Thana- Vishwavidalaya District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar S/o Lakhan Tanti R/o G.N. Mukherjee Road Naya Tola, Bhikhanpur Gumti No.1, P.S- Ishakchak, Dist- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ranjan Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Narsingh Tanti, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 17-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The accused-petitioner, named in the F.I.R., is apprehending his arrest in connection with University P.S. Case No. 58 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short, the 'B.N.S.').
3. The allegation against the petitioner is to commit the offence of cheating by creating forge documents being a Class III employee of the T.M.B. University, Bhagalpur and in such way issued several forged certificates.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87060 of 2025(2) dt.17-02-2026 2/3 petitioner submitted that this type of error i.e. entry of marks in a particular column in the marksheet, is a common mistake due to other work load and, therefore, if any irregularities of wrong entry of marks found in the marksheet of some of the candidates, same cannot be said to be done intentionally.
5. It is submitted that no benefit arising out of such wrong entry was accrued by this petitioner and save and except suspicion that same was done against cash or monetary consideration, nothing available incriminating against this petitioner. It is submitted that complaint pressed by the candidate Anjali Kumar and Manish Kumar is not the part of FIR and, therefore, the very basis of FIR appears doubtful.
6. Arguing further, it is submitted that maximum allegation appears against this petitioner is of negligence in duty for which he already punished sufficiently as he was put on suspension and facing departmental proceeding. Explaining criminal antecedent of the petitioner, it is submitted that petitioner found involved in one more case of different nature, in which he is on bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87060 of 2025(2) dt.17-02-2026 3/3
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
8. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of the fact as implication prima facie appears to be raised on the basis of suspicion against monetary consideration, accordingly, above-named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks from this order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. - IInd, Bhagalpur/concerned court in connection with University P.S. Case No. 58 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short "B.N.S.S.").
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Rajeev/- U T