Dismissed¶22

Rajeev Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Dec 2025CR. MISC./60939/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail rejected; forged ITI certificate allegation; sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC; Mahnar P.S. Case No. 44 of 2020, District Vaishali; earlier application Cr. Misc. No. 39423 of 2023 rejected on technical ground; direction that petitioner surrender and seek regular bail; Patna High Court; Justice Rajiv Roy; decision dated 17-12-2025.

What did the court decide?

Since the FIR is of the year 2020 and the petitioner's earlier application (Cr. Misc. No. 39423 of 2023) was rejected on a technical ground, instead of having it revived, it is high time that he surrenders and seeks bail. ¶21

Rajeev Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60939 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2020 Thana- MAHNAR District- Vaishali

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Rajeev Kumar S/o Lalo Mahto R/o Village- Sherpur, Dhepura, P.S.Vidhayapati Nagar, District- Samastipur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anupam Bahadur, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶12

4 17-12-2025

¶13

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶14

APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mahnar P.S. Case No. 44 of 2020 for the offence registered under sections 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC.

¶16

As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that he gave a certificate of ITI to join the department which later was found to be forged and accordingly, the FIR.

¶17

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the department took years to come to the conclusion that it is a forged certificate and accordingly, lodged FIR and that is the best ground for granting bail.

¶18

Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail submitting that the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60939 of 2025(4) dt.17-12-2025 2/2

¶20

petitioner is appearing in an anticipatory bail application and not in a quashing application, he has acknowledged that it is a forged certificate and the FIR is of the year 2020.

¶21

Considering the submissions of the parties as also the fact that the FIR is of the year 2020, earlier, the petitioner moved before this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 39423 of 2023 which came to be rejected on technical ground. Instead of getting it revived and/or surrendering and seeking bail, the learned APP has rightly pointed out that the FIR is of the year 2020, it is high time that he surrenders and seek bail.

¶22

The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

¶23

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶24

Vijay Singh/-

¶25

U T

Rajeev Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bihar State Electricity Board Vs M/S Gaya Cotton and Jute Mills L

Madhukar Vs Mr. Sanjeev Hansh, the Principal Secretary, Department of Energy

Parmeshwar Dubey Vs The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms

Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sunny Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nitish Paswan @ Nitish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar