Patna High Court

Geeta Kumari @ Gita KumariversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 26 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted notwithstanding the seriousness of the offences, provided the petitioner furnishes the required bail bond and sureties and complies with the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.

Summary

Geeta Kumari sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) alleging she obtained a teaching appointment through a forged marksheet. She contended that the FIR was filed without a prior show‑cause notice and that she was falsely implicated by the informant, leading to termination of her services. The State opposed the bail. The Court examined whether anticipatory bail could be granted despite the seriousness of the offences and the alleged procedural lapse. It ordered that, if arrested or surrendered within six weeks, the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties of equal amount, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the IPC.
Whether the absence of a show‑cause notice prior to filing the FIR warrants granting anticipatory bail.
Whether the petitioner poses a risk of absconding or tampering with evidence justifying denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 420, 467, 468, 471

Subjects

anticipatory bail
forgery
IPC offences
Section 438 CrPC
show‑cause notice
teacher appointment
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9756 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2025 Thana- SIDHWALIYA District- Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Geeta Kumari @ Gita Kumari Daughter of Sakaldeo Pandit Resident of
                 Village- Dangsi, P.S.- Sidhwalia, District- Gopalganj
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.    The Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Patna bihar
                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Mithilesh Kr. Upadhyay, Adv.
                                                  Mr. Tetara Kumari, Adv.
                                                  Mr. Raju Prasad, Adv.
                                                  Mr. Harendra Kumar, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Renuka Ratnakar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   26-03-2026                   1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467,

                   468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

                                 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and in sum and substance

                   the allegation is that petitioner was appointed as Teacher, based

                   on forged and fabricated marksheet.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

                   informant. It is next submitted that prior to instituting the instant

                   FIR, no show-cause was issued to the petitioner seeking her
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9756 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
                                                         2/2




                       explanation. It is also submitted that if a show-cause would have

                       been given to the petitioner, perhaps the FIR would not have

                       been instituted after the authorities had perused her evidence. It

                       is next submitted that the services of the petitioner also stands

                       terminated.

                                    5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

                       anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                                    6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                       counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

                       event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks

                       from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail

                       bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties

                       of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial

                       court where the case is pending/successor court in connection

                       with Sidhwalia P.S. Case No.183/2025, subject to the conditions

                       as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.



                                                         (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…