Patna High Court
Manish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to conditions, as his clean antecedent and the nature of the allegations do not preclude bail under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) BNSS.
Summary
Manish Kumar, a government teacher, was arrested under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC for allegedly forging educational certificates to obtain his job. He contended that the documents were genuine, that he was a victim of a mass drive, and that he had been removed from service without a written order, prompting a writ petition. The High Court, noting his clean antecedent and the nature of the allegations, directed that he be released on bail if he surrendered within four weeks, provided he posted a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The court did not entertain the claim of amnesty as the petitioner believed his certificates were genuine. Consequently, bail was granted with the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the petitioner in offences of forgery and fraud under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC.
- Whether the FIR lodged against the petitioner is maintainable given his claim of genuine documents and alleged procedural irregularities.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120, 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- bail
- forgery
- fraud
- government employment
- IPC
- CrPC
- BNSS
- amnesty scheme
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81520 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-234 Year-2025 Thana- ARA MUFFSIL District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Manish Kumar S/o Late Ganesh Singh Resident of village- Hatti tola, P.S. -
Angiyao Bazar, Distt- Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Union of India through Special Vigilance Unit India
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mohit Shriwastava, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Mishra, APP
For the Vigilance : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 20-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The accused-petitioner, named in the F.I.R., is
apprehending his arrest in connection with Ara Muffasil P.S.
Case No. 234 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. As per FIR, petitioner alleged to obtain job of
government teacher on the basis of forged and fabricated
educational documents/certificates.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that out of confusion, the petitioner was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81520 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
2/4
implicated with the present case and FIR was lodged against
him, which is the result of the mass drive. It is submitted that
in fact the petitioner is himself a victim and merely on the
basis of FIR, he was removed from service without any order
in writing and as such being a bonafide employee, when he
approached before the authority concerned for his joining, he
was not allowed to join.
5. It is submitted that being aggrieved with the
aforesaid decision of the authority concerned, the petitioner
preferred writ application before this Court which was
disposed vide order dated 05.02.2026 passed in C.W.J.C. No.
1802 of 2026, wherein learned coordinate Bench of this Court
directed the District Education Officer, Bhojpur, Ara to pass a
reasoned and speaking order qua grievance of the petitioner.
It is submitted that all the documents relied upon by the
petitioner is genuine and, therefore, lodging of the present
FIR is false on the part of the authority concerned.
6. Arguing further, it is submitted that petitioner could
not avail the amnesty scheme as approved by the Hon’ble
Division Bench of this Court through CWJC No. 15459/2014,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81520 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
3/4
for the reason that he is under believe that his certificate is
genuine and, therefore, no occasion to avail any amnesty
scheme which was given for one time to those teachers who
were submitted their forged certificates before the authority
concerned. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Department of Vigilance submitted that allegation against the
petitioner is specific qua submitting forged and fabricated
documents.
8. In view of aforesaid submission and by taking note
of the fact as the petitioner appears fighting for his claim in
support of genuineness of his degree and also considering the
nature of overall accusation, above-named petitioner, who is
a man of clean antecedent, in the event of his
arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks from this
order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail
bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate – 6th, Bhojpur at Ara/concerned court
in connection with Ara Muffasil P.S. Case No. 234 of 2025,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81520 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
4/4
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…