SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 2859

PATNA HIGH COURT
Arun Kumar Jha, J
Rambha Devi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32316 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Rajesh Kumar
For the Respondents: Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP

Concealment of criminal antecedents in bail applications can lead to cancellation of granted bail by the court.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to the cancellation of anticipatory bail granted under Cr. Misc. No. 32316 of 2025, wherein the petitioner failed to disclose criminal antecedents leading to the court’s conclusion of fraudulent concealment. The court observed that concealment of material facts in bail applications undermines the judicial process.

Result: The court cancelled the anticipatory bail and directed the petitioner to surrender to the trial court.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

5 05-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. It appears from the records that the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 22.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 32316 of 2025 by this Court having regard to the facts and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the parties and after considering the fact that no recovery has been shown from the petitioner and further considering her clean antecedent and the possibility of false accusation. Thereafter, on 12.11.2025, the record taken up at the instance of the Court after receipt of a communication whereby this Court has been informed that the petitioner procured anticipatory bail by in Adapur P.S. Case No. 321 of 2023, Adapur P.S. Case No. 162 of 2017 and Chhauradano P.S. Case No. 26 of 2020. After taking congnizance of the aforesaid communication, the petitioner was directed to file show cause as to why the bail granted to her be not cancelled for concealment of criminal antecedent and pursuant thereto, a show cause has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the husband of the petitioner sworn the affidavit in this case as pairvikar and being an illiterate person, he could not give the reference of the cases in which the petitioner has been made accused. In the show cause, it has been mentioned that the petitioner is having antecedent of three cases, but the said fact could not be brought on record when the present case has been filed. The learned counsel reiterates that the petitioner or her pairvikar did not conceal the facts deliberately and this mistake was only due to their illiteracy.

4. In any case, the petitioner was supposed to furnish the details about her criminal antecedent in paragraph 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner failed to bring out the criminal antecedent in the said paragraph. Therefore, the petitioner played fraud upon the Court and the ground taken for not believable. Apparently, there is active concealment of criminal antecedent by the petitioner.

5. So, I am of the considered view that these are the matters which are to be taken seriously otherwise anybody may endeavour to play a fraud upon Court by concealment of material facts, such as, criminal antecedents of an accused and this Court finds that these attempts are being made now regularly and the Court has come across several circumstances in which concealment of criminal antecedents have been noticed.

6. Therefore, considering the fact that a false averment has been made before this Court in order to procure bail from this Court, I think it just and proper that the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 22.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 32316 of 2025 be cancelled and the same is hereby cancelled and she is directed to surrender before the learned trial court within two weeks from today, failing which the learned trial court will take all coercive steps for arrest of the petitioner.

7. However, considering the nature of allegation and illiteracy of the petitioner or her pairvikar, this Court refrains from passing any adverse order against them.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top