In this oral order, the Patna High Court rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail under Sections 406, 409, and others of the IPC, citing sufficient material in the case diary showing illegality in a Panchayat selection process.
Prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14056 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2014 Thana- KUMAR KHAND District- Madhepura
======================================================
DEEP NARAYAN KUMAR Son of Mahendra Prasad Resident of Village - Bardaha, Tola Pathraha, P.S.- Ghailadh, District - Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vikram Devi Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Mishra, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER
5 08-03-2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kumarkhand P.S. Case No. 150 of 2014 registered under Sections 406, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 472/34 of the I.P.C. pending in the Court of A.C.J.M.-I, Madhepura.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is a Panchayat Secretary. He is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case due to dirty village politics. Further submission is that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer of the petitioner by contending that petitioner is a Panchayat Secretary. There is sufficient material
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14056 of 2020(5) dt.08-03-2021 2/2
in the case diary to show the commission of illegality in the selection process of Panchayat Teacher by the petitioner. Hence, petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of the allegation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner is rejected.
(Arvind Srivastava, J)
shailendra/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner facing allegations of cheating and forgery.
Deep Narayan Kumar
Arvin Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
