Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ritesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was not granted as the court was not inclined to extend such relief given the seriousness of the alleged offences.

Summary

The petitioner, Ritesh Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS No. 719 of 2024) alleging that he arranged for a proxy to appear in a constable recruitment examination, violating Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 112(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 10 of the Bihar Conduct of Examination Act. The prosecution alleged that another person impersonated the petitioner to secure selection illegally. The High Court examined whether the seriousness of the alleged offences warranted granting anticipatory bail. Considering the nature and gravity of the alleged proxy examination and cheating offences, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail and dismissed the application. The petitioner was directed to surrender within two weeks to seek regular bail, and the Court clarified that its observations were limited to this application.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate discretion of the court in granting or refusing anticipatory bail in cases involving alleged proxy examination and related offences?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • proxy examination
  • cheating
  • criminal procedure
  • bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31497 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-719 Year-2024 Thana- GARDANIBAG District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Ritesh Kumar S/O Sunil Prasad Yadav R/O Village- Khutoha, P.S.- Bypass,
                 Distt.- Bhagalpur, Bihar.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Raj Kishor Prasad
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Ajay Mishra
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   14-05-2026                  Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

                   learned counsel for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

                   Gardanibagh P.S. Case No. 719 of 2024 registered for the

                   offence under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 112(2) of

                   the BNS and Section 10 of the Bihar Conduct of Examination

                   Act.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is a

                   candidate       on     whose     behalf     another      person      allegedly

                   impersonated him and appeared in the Constable Recruitment

                   Examination. The allegation against the petitioner is that he

                   arranged for a proxy candidate to write the examination in his

                   place in order to secure selection illegally.

                                4. Considering the nature and the gravity of the
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31497 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
                                                        2/2




                      offence, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of

                      anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.

                                   5. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is

                      hereby dismissed.

                                   6. However, the petitioner is at liberty to surrender in

                      the court below within a period of two weeks from today and

                      seek regular bail, if so advised.

                                   7. It is, however, clarified that the observations made

                      herein are limited to the adjudication of the present application

                      and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at any

                      subsequent stage of the proceedings.



                                                              (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.