Allowed

Mridula Sinha and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar Through The Superintendent Of Police, Vigilance Department, Vigilance Investigat

Patna HC22 Sept 2016CR. MISC./40742/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners charged in a Vigilance case regarding illegal teacher appointments. The court noted no specific fraud allegations and approved bail under CrPC Section 438(2).

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted anticipatory bail on furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties of like amount if arrested within six weeks.

Mridula Sinha and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar Through The… — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.40742 of 2016

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -109 Year- 2015 Thana -C.B.I CASE District- PATNA

¶3

====================================================== 1. Mridula Sinha, Daughter of Chandeshwar Pd.m resident of VillageMohamadpur, P.S.Chandi, District-Nalanda 2. Rina Kumari, D/o Shicnandan Prasad, Resident of Village-Kutulupur, P.S.- Ben, District-Nalanda

¶4

Subida Kumari, D/o Kameshwar Ravidas, resident of village-Narayanpur, P.S.-Hilsa, District- Nalanda

¶5

Jai Rani Kumari, D/o Sri Surenra Prasad, Resident of Village-Bakaur, P.S.-Islampur, District-Nalanda

¶6

Bindu Kumar, S/o Late Bhatu Mahto Resident of Village-Dharhara, P.S. Nalanda, District-Nalanda

¶7

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Bihar through the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Department, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Patna

¶10

.... .... Opposite Party/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rama Kant Sharma(L.O,I/C Vigi) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 22-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶13

This application for grant of anticipatory bail arises out of Vigilance P.S. Case No. 109 of 2015, disclosing offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 477A, 192, 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with 13(1) (d) of he Prevention of Corruption Act.

¶14

The petitioners are working as Panchayat Teachers under Eksara Panchayat of Ben Block in the district of Nalanda.

¶15

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40742 of 2016 (2) dt.22-09-2016

¶16

2/3

¶17

The Vigilance Bureau has registered the case on the basis of direction issued by this Court in a batch of writ applications which has been mentioned in the First Information Report itself.

¶18

The main allegation is of making selections and appointments against the post of Panchayat Teachers without following due procedure prescribed.

¶19

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that there is no specific allegation of any misrepresentation or fraud committed by these petitioners in the First Information Report leading to their selection.

¶20

It has lastly been submitted that in any event there is no chance that they will fleeing from course of investigation or trial.

¶21

Considering the nature of allegation and the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners, this application is allowed.

¶22

Let the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Vigilance 1^st , Patna in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 109 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of

¶23

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40742 of 2016 (2) dt.22-09-2016

¶24

3/3

¶25

Criminal Procedure.

¶26

This is subject to the condition that the petitioners shall present themselves before the police/Court, as the case may be, as and when required and in the event of failure on their part to appear before the Court on two consecutive occasions, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled.

¶27

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)

¶28

Vats/U T

Mridula Sinha and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar Through The Superintendent Of Police, Vigilance Department, Vigilance Investigat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mridula Sinha and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar Through The Superintendent Of Police, Vigilance Department, Vigilance Investigat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalit Narayan Chaudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

The Managing Director, Bihar Fruit And Vegetable Development Corporation Ltd., Patna and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Raja Kewat Vs The State Of Bihar

Benju Singh @ Munna Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Mahesh Sao Vs The State Of Bihar

Arun Sah and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar