Patna High Court
Ravi Shankar RamversusThe State of Bihar through the Superintendent of Police Vigilance Investigation Bureau Patna
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Ravi Shankar Ram, a government employee, was arrested in connection with a bribery allegation under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 61(2)(a) of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that he, together with a co‑accused, demanded Rs.20,000 as a bribe from a water‑preservation official and was caught in a sting operation. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that the cash was handed only to the co‑accused, and that he has no criminal record and has been in custody since 30‑01‑2026. The defence argued that the demand for a second instalment of funds was not proven and that the petitioner merely objected to substandard work. After hearing both sides, the Court found no compelling reason to deny bail and ordered the petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The order was pronounced by Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 61(2)(a) of the B.N.S.
- Whether the allegations of bribery constitute a ground to deny bail on the basis of flight risk or tampering with evidence
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 61(2)(a)
- Prevention of Corruption Act — s. 7
Subjects
- bail
- bribery
- corruption
- Prevention of Corruption Act
- B.N.S.
- government employee
- Vigilance
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17358 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2026 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna
======================================================
Ravi Shankar Ram, Son of Raj Kumar Ram, Resident of village- Kaithi, Raj
Colony, Ward no. 5, P.S- Anti (Delha), District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Superintendent of Police Vigilance
Investigation Bureau Patna Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rama Kant Sharma, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the SVU : Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, Advocate (Law Officer)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
CAV ORDER
4 10-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the SVU.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with
S.V.U. P.S. Case No.04 of 2026 registered for the offence
punishable under Section 7 of P.C. Act and Section 61(2)(a) of
B.N.S.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner was the Assistant Director of the Project Implementation
Unit which was authorized to make arrangement for conservation
of water in area having less rainfall by constructing dam, pond,
plantation, digging well or renovation of well. The work was
executed by beneficiary, under scheme, under supervision of
committee of farmers. It is alleged that under the Koluha Water
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17358 of 2026(4) dt.10-04-2026
2/3
Preservation Committee, work was executed under Scheme and
first installment of Rs. 1,08,400/- was paid in the account of
Umesh Singh, the informant. The work was executed through
Arvind Kumar, Secretary of Water Preservation Panchayat,
Koluha. It is alleged that the petitioner and Anjani Kumar
demanded a bribe of Rs. 20,000/- from Arvind Kumar. As they
were not willing to give bribe, they filed a complaint before S.V.U.
After filing the complaint, the verification was made and the
allegation was found to be true against the petitioner and co-
accused. Thereafter, a trap was laid and the petitioner and co-
accused Anjani Kumar were caught raid handed while accepting
the bribe amount.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no
offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Admittedly,
the complainant received the money of the first installment to the
tune of Rs. 1,08,400/- but he has not disclosed the amount of
second installment, so, there was an occasion of demand of bribe.
It has further been submitted that from perusal of Annexure-P/2, it
will transpire that the petitioner has objected the substandard work
being carried out by the complainants. Being aggrieved by the
show cause issued by the petitioner, he was trapped by the
complainants in a false trap case. It has further been submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17358 of 2026(4) dt.10-04-2026
3/3
from perusal of the post trap memo, it will transpire that first of
all, the cash was handed over to Anjani Kumar and the same was
handed over to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner
has submitted that directly nothing was handed over to the
petitioner. The amount, if any, was given to Anjani Kumar. It has
further been submitted that petitioner is a Government Employee.
He is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in
judicial custody since 30.01.2026.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the S.V.U. has
vehemently opposed the application for bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge,
Vigilance, Patna in connection with S.V.U. P.S. Case No. 04 of
2026.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 07.04.2026
Uploading Date 10.04.2026
Transmission Date 10.04.2026
Checking your session…