Tinku Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bhola Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 17-01-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bihta P.S. Case No. 848 of 2024, F.I.R dated 09.09.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 319(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶15

According to prosecution case, informant, Vinay Sheel, Revenue Officer, Bihta, submitted a written report to the S.H.O., Bihta Police Station for registration of FIR pursuant to the order dated 01.04.2024 passed by the Bihar State Information Commission in Case No. A-5244/2021. It is alleged that the name of Siya Ram Singh was duly entered in Jamabandi No. 1016 of Thana No. 68, Mouza Purushottam Painathi by the

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69386 of 2025(3) dt.17-01-2026 2/4

¶17

competent authority, but was later struck off by putting initials when the petitioner was posted as In-charge Revenue Karamchari. The informant alleged that such alteration amounted to a criminal act and, on that basis, requested lodging of the FIR. Accordingly, the FIR was instituted and investigation was set in motion.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner by taking this Court to the allegations in the First Information Report submits that for creating jamabandi in the name of wrong person, the instant F.I.R is said to have been lodged, while the necessary correction by resorting to the procedure has been provided in law and same has already been done. Petitioner is said to be Halka Karmchari in the office of Circle Officer, Bihta and submits that the jamabandi could not have been created without obtaining permission from the Circle Officer, Bihta, still this petitioner has been implicated in this case. In view of the statement so made that necessary correction in jamabandi has already been carried out, and to buttress his submissions, he refers to the documents forming part of Register-2, which is recorded in the name of Nanda Singh, who is said to be the correct person in whose name jamabandi was supposed to have been created.

¶19

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69386 of 2025(3) dt.17-01-2026 3/4

¶21

anticipatory bail application.

¶22

Be that as it may, necessary corrections have already been carried out by resorting the procedure as provided in law, prima facie , the case for anticipatory bail is made out. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶23

Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 A.C.J.M-I, Danapur in connection with Bihta P.S. Case No. 848 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-

¶24

(i) one of the bailors should be the family member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

¶25

(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69386 of 2025(3) dt.17-01-2026 4/4

¶27

cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

¶28

(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or

¶29

promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

¶30

(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.

¶31

(Ajit Kumar, J)

¶32

abhishekkr/-

¶33

U T

Tinku Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tinku Kumar v. The State of 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

Sudhihar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Pintu @ Pintu Khan Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kumar Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Tauhid @ Saud Khan @ Tauhid @ Md. Tahid Khan Vs The State of Bihar