Patna High Court

Rajeev KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 20 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

Rajeev Kumar applied for anticipatory bail after learning that he was likely to be arrested in a case (Mahanar PS Case No. 201 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code for obtaining a forged employment letter. He contended that he was innocent, that the dispute was purely documentary, and that he neither fabricated nor misrepresented any documents. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged offences and the findings of the investigating department that the employment letter was forged. The Additional Sessions Judge had earlier ordered the FIR based on a medical officer's report, and the investigation was ongoing. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions and the gravity of the charges, declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding that the circumstances did not warrant such relief. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in light of the alleged offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 420, 467, 468, 471

Subjects

anticipatory bail
forgery
Indian Penal Code
Section 406
Section 420
Section 467
Section 468
Section 471
criminal law

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81597 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2025 Thana- MAHNAR District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Rajeev Kumar, aged about 42 years, Male, Son of Ramakant Prasad Singh,
                 Resident of Village - Ram Ajgara, P.O- Samaya No – 5, Bhadaur, Patna,
                 Bihar.
                                                                          ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                   ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Sanket, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, APP
              ======================================================
             CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
                                    ORAL ORDER

5   20-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Mahanar P.S. Case No. 201 of 2025 instituted for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471

                   of the Indian Penal Code.

                                3. As per allegation in the FIR, the petitioner obtained

                   forged employment letter on the basis of forgery.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this

                   case. He submits that the dispute is purely documentary in

                   nature. He further submits that the petitioner has neither

                   fabricated the documents nor misrepresented the facts. He next

                   submits that the petitioner has not forged any document and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81597 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026
                                            2/3




          same was communicated from the department to the local

          district authority and the petitioner has no role to the same. He

          lastly submits that the authorities have made allegation of

          document being forced by the petitioner is based on conjectures

          and surmises. Petitioner has got clean antecedent as stated in

          para 3 of the petition.

                       5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       6. From perusal of the FIR, case diary and also

          perused the impugned order dated 07.10.2025 passed by the

          learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Vaishali at Hajipur, it

          appears that on the basis of written report of the Medical

          Officere, namely Dr. Alka Kumari, FIR has been registered

          under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal

          Code against the present petitioner, Rajeev Kumar and the

          allegation is for obtaining employment letter on the basis of

          forgery. After due enquiry, the concerned department found the

          employment letter to be forged. Investigation is going on and

          the allegation under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the

          Indian Penal Code is so serious against the present petitioner,

          so, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case

          and submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81597 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                      involvement of the petitioner in the alleged commission of

                      offence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the

                      petitioner.

                                    7. Accordingly, the application stands rejected.


                                                                (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

Anand Kr.

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…