Patna High Court
Pappu Kumar @ Pappu Kumar SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted subject to specified conditions, as the petitioner is willing to resign and cooperate with the investigation.
Summary
The petitioner, Pappu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Harsidhi PS Case No. 10 of 2025) involving alleged offences under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B, based on a claim that his TET certificate was forged during a vigilance enquiry ordered by a 2014 court. He argued that he was not given an opportunity to rebut the allegation and offered to resign within two weeks and cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed bail, contending that the petitioner obtained his appointment through fraud and should not enjoy bail privilege. The Court, after considering the petitioner's undertaking and noting that the appointment had been made after prior verification, granted bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, submission of his resignation letter, and the requirement that one bailor be a close family member, invoking Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The order directs that the bail be effective for six weeks from the receipt of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of offences under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B on the basis of alleged forged TET certificate.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged fraud in obtaining his appointment bars the grant of bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail conditions
- forgery
- TET certificate
- IPC sections 420
- IPC sections 467
- IPC sections 468
- IPC sections 471
- IPC section 120B
- vigilance enquiry
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91232 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2025 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Pappu Kumar @ Pappu Kumar Sahani S/o Dinanath Sahani Resident of
Village- Raghunathpur, P.S.- Turkauliya District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prateek Tandon
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Harsidhi P.S. Case No. 10 of 2025, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case based upon the written report
alleges that in compliance with the order of this Court passed in
CWJC No. 15459 of 2014, an enquiry was conducted by the
Vigilance and in course of enquiry, the TET certificate produced
by the petitioner at the time of selection has been found to be
forged and fabricated, which led to institution of the present
case.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91232 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
at no point of time the petitioner had been given any opportunity
to rebut the allegation; moreover the identically situated
persons, on being aggrieved with the order passed by the
Department, have approached this Court in CWJC No. 8723 of
2019 and in their cases, they have been allowed to continue to
discharge their duties but discrimination has been caused to the
petitioner. Learned Advocate for the petitioner, on instruction,
submits before this Court that the petitioner is willing to tender
his resignation within a period of two weeks from today and
participate in the investigation and the proceeding of the court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the
petitioner has obtained his appointment by playing a fraud upon
the Department and, as such, he does not deserve the privilege
of anticipatory bail.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the
learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note of the
undertaking of the petitioner that he intends to tender his resignation
within fortnight and shall cooperate in the investigation, besides the
fact the appointment took place much earlier after proper verification
of the certificate, let the petitioner abovenamed be released on bail, in
the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91232 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a
copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari,
East Champaran in connection with Harsidhi P.S. Case No. 10
of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of
the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the further
conditions:
(i) that the petitioner shall submit the copy of
resignation letter at the time of furnishing bail bond and,
(ii) that one of the bailors shall be the own/close
family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
Anjani/-
U T
Checking your session…