Patna High Court
Kailash DasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond and verification of his criminal antecedent, notwithstanding the allegations of conspiracy.
Summary
The petitioner, Kailash Das, sought anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged conspiracy to facilitate the appointment of a teacher using forged certificates, with the FIR charging offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120(B) and 471 IPC. The prosecution argued that the petitioner was a conspirator, while the petitioner’s counsel contended his innocence, clean criminal record, advanced age, and that the selection was made by a committee which had already been granted anticipatory bail. The court noted that similar accused had been granted bail and, applying the Bail and Surrender of Sureties Act, 2023, ordered anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs 30,000 and verification of criminal antecedents. The trial court was directed to verify the petitioner’s antecedents and cancel the bail if concealment is found. The order thus granted anticipatory bail with conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bail and Surrender of Sureties Act, 2023 despite alleged involvement in conspiracy and forgery.
- Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to co‑accused influences the petitioner’s claim for bail.
- What conditions and bond amount are appropriate under Section 2(1)(d) and Section 482(2) of the Bail and Surrender of Sureties Act, 2023.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120, 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- conspiracy
- forgery
- Indian Penal Code
- Bail and Surrender of Sureties Act
- criminal antecedent
- section 420
- section 467
- section 468
- section 120B
- section 471
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10562 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2022 Thana- PRANPUR District- Katihar
======================================================
Kailash Das Son of Dayal Das Resident of Chhoti Bhaisdiyara, P.S.- Barari,
District- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Mandal, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Pranpur (Roshna) P.S. Case No. 201 of 2022, dated
14.09.2022, lodged under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120(B) and
471 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged
against the sole accused person other than the present petitioner.
The Panchayat teacher, namely Neelam Kumari, who was
posted at Primary School, Kahjunia Panchayat Gauripur, Block
Pranpur, District Katihar. The verification of the certificate of
the said teacher was made by the Vigilance Investigation
Bureau, specifically, the mark sheet and certificate issued by the
Sanskrit Shiksha Board in favor of the teacher were found to be
forged.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10562 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/4
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel
further submits that the petitioner’s name has surfaced later
during investigation, and the petitioner was the Panchayat
Secretary at the relevant period of time, but in the investigation
it has come that he has conspired with the main accused and
allowed her to get selected using a forged certificate. Counsel
further submits that, in this regard, the main accused person had
placed forged and fabricated certificates at the time of selection.
Counsel further submits that her appointment was made with the
condition that if the certificate is found to be forged, then she
shall be removed and action shall be taken against her. Counsel
further submits that the selection was not made by the petitioner,
rather, it was made by the Committee members, and the Co-
ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court has been pleased to grant
anticipatory bail to the accused committee members vide order
dated 12.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 52349 of 2024,
annexed as Annexure-P/3. Counsel further submits that the main
accused person has also been granted anticipatory bail vide
order dated 10.04.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5845 of 2023,
annexed as Annexure-P/2. Counsel further submits that the
petitioner has clean criminal antecedent. Counsel also submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10562 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/4
that the petitioner is aged about 63 years and is ready to fulfill
all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed by this Court.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner’s name has
come up as a conspirator in the present case.
6. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of
this case, and particularly considering that the petitioner is not
named and similarly situated persons have already been granted
bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, let the above-
named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of
arrest or surrender before the Trial Court within a period of 4
weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/-
(Rupees Thirty Thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of
the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate 1 st
Class, Katihar, in connection with Pranpur (Roshna) P.S. Case
No. 201 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s
482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
7. The Trial Court is hereby directed to verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner, and in case it is found at
any stage that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedent, the Trial Court shall take steps for cancellation of
the petitioner’s bail bond. However, the acceptance of the bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10562 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
4/4
bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed
for the purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…