Saroj Kumar Singh @ Saroj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar through Vigilance Investigaion Bureau Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29520 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2026 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna

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

Saroj Kumar Singh @ Saroj Kumar S/o Late Bharat Singh District Mining Office Kishanganj, Police Station Kishanganj, District Kishanganj, At present resident of 1353/A Ward No. 3 Nahar Canal Road, New Sabajpura -CumKhagaul, Police Station Phulwarisarif, District Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through Vigilance Investigaion Bureau Bihar Patna

¶7

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vivekanand Singh, Advocate For the Vigilance : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Law Officer

¶9

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

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 04-05-2026 Heard Mr. Vivekanand Singh, learned counsel for

¶12

the petitioner as well as Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the Vigilance Department.

¶13

Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 18.02.2026 in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 20 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 16.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 7(a), 7(c) , 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Section 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

¶14

According to prosecution case, it is alleged that the petitioner along with other accused person demanded Rs. 10,000/- as bribe from the informant to release his seized vehicle from the office of Mining Department.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is a Government

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29520 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026 2/3

¶17

Servant working on the post of Peon in Mining Department, Kishanganj. He next submits that petitioner has not been named in the written application of the informant, on the basis of which the present FIR has been registered rather only allegation has been made in the written application against co-accused, Ashok Kumar Choudhary, Head Clerk of Mining Department, Kishanganj. He further submits that Vigilance trap team caught the petitioner red handed and recovered Rs.7000/- from his pocket. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner on 14.04.2026 and the petitioner is in custody since 18.02.2026.

¶18

The learned counsel for the Vigilance Department has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was caught red handed by the Vigilance trap team but fairly submits that after completion of the investigation, the Vigilance Department has submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner.

¶19

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, 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 Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge (Vigilance), Bhagalpur in

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29520 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026 3/3

¶21

connection with Vigilance Case No. 20 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

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.

¶23

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.

¶24

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 acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶25

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶26

Suruchi/-

¶27

U T

Saroj Kumar Singh @ Saroj Kumar v. The State of Bihar through Vigilance Investigaion Bureau Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saroj Kumar Singh @ Saroj Kumar v. The State of Bihar through Vigilance Investigaion Bureau Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kaif Ansari @ Kaif Khatarnak Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Shani Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Vikash Sah @ Vikash Saw Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Chaudhary @ Baiju Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Raviranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar