Babulal Chaudhary @ Babulal ChaudhariversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30139 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2026 Thana- BAHERA District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Babulal Chaudhary @ Babulal Chaudhari S/o- Late Jagdish Chaudhary R/v-
                 Mohammadpur Ps- Giriyak Dist- Nalanda

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Krishna Deo Raj, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   07-05-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection

                   with Bahera P.S. Case No. 105 of 2026 lodged on 08.02.2026,

                   for the offence punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338,

                   336(3), 340(2) & 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

                   and section 10 of the Bihar Conduct of Examinations Act, 1981,

                   pending in the Court of A.C.J.M., Benipur, Darbhanga.

                                3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against

                   two named accused persons other than the petitioner. It has been

                   alleged in the FIR that accused person Suman Raj appeared in

                   the examination of CTET in place of accused Sahil Kumar by

                   using forged and fabricated Aadhar Card.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30139 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and he has

          been unnecessarily made accused in this case. Counsel submits

          that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name has

          come in this case by virtue of confessional statement during the

          investigation. Counsel submits that in the FIR, there is no

          disclosure against him and by Annexure-P/2, it is evident that on

          the said date of examination, the petitioner was at Nalanda and

          not at Darbhanga where the alleged forgery and offence have

          been committed. He submits that the petitioner is a teacher,

          having clean antecedent.

                       5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          bail of the petitioner and submits that the trial court at the time

          of rejection of the bail has categorically acknowledged after

          going through different paragraphs of the case diary in which,

          the co-accused has given statement by which involvement of the

          petitioner has clearly transpired. It has also been observed by

          the Sessions Court that case diary, CDR and SDR of the

          petitioner is attached in which, tower location of the petitioner is

          found in Nalanda and there are details of accused petitioner

          being on telephonic conversation with the co-accused.

                       6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case,
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30139 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
                                                         3/3




                       considering that huge forgery and interpolation is going on in

                       the different exams as also in the present case, this Court is not

                       inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer

                       for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected.



                                                                       (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-

U      T