MD. USMAN v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 120(B), 419, 420, 467, 468, 471
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER Mr. Binay Kumar Mr. Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam 2 14-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
#2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
#3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner is of submission of forged education certificates for appointment as Home Guard.
#4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that the certificates of the petitioner were not verified by the Bihar School Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55869 of 2024(2) dt.14-08-2024 Examination Board and the petitioner has not been appointed in pursuance to the said selection process. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been languishing in custody since
26.05.2024.
#5. Learned APP for the State opposed the bail petition.
#6. Considering the facts aforesaid and the custody of the petitioner, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Lakhisarai (Kabaiya) P.S. Case No. 100 of 2018. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.