Patna High Court - Orders
Satish Ranjan vs The State Of Bihar on 20 November, 2024
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63047 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-565 Year-2024 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Satish Ranjan, S/o- Mahendra Singh, R/o Village- Chakrabha Nichli Dih, PS-
Raphiganj, District-Aurangabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 20-11-2024Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 565 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338 and 336(3) of the B.N.S. 2023 and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Bihar Examination Conduct Act, 1981.
3. Allegedly, in the Teachers Appointment Competitive Examination 2024, conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission, this petitioner was apprehended by the Invigilator on account of mismatch of his finger prints and it transpired that his name is Mukesh Kumar, who had been Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63047 of 2024(3) dt.20-11-2024 2/4 appearing on behalf of other candidate and his date of birth also did not match with the admit card.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is a bona fide candidate, who appeared in the examination conducted by the B.P.S.C. However, only on account of the fact that earlier the petitioner had appeared in Matriculation examination in the name of one Mukesh Kumar and later on he again appeared in subsequent Matriculation examination in order to get good marks with the name of Satish Ranjan, a suspicion has been raised leading to institution of the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner clarified the position that on the alleged date of examination, the petitioner had appeared but on account of some mismatch in the thumb impression, the present case has been instituted. During the course of investigation, the police also found that both Satish Ranjan and Mukesh Kumar is one and the same person, however, taking note of the fact that the petitioner had twice appeared in Matriculation examination with two different names, the police submitted charge-sheet, suggesting complicity of the petitioner in the present crime. It is lastly contended that be that as it may, the petitioner is a bona fide student and now he has been incarcerated since 23.07.2024 having fair antecedent and he has Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63047 of 2024(3) dt.20-11-2024 3/4 been sufficiently punished.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that the materials collected during the course of investigation, suggest complicity of the petitioner in the present crime.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner was a bona faide student, however, he twice appeared in Matriculation examination with two different names and now the investigation of the crime is complete and the charge-sheet has been submitted, apart from the fair antecedent, let the petitioner, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Jehanabad in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 565 of 2024, subject to the condition that one of the bailors will be the close relatives of the petitioner with further conditions which are as follows:-
(i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of the trial.
(ii) He will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63047 of 2024(3) dt.20-11-2024 4/4
(iii) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial.
(iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates without any cogent reason, his bail bonds will liable to be cancelled.
(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/-
U T