Pankaj Kumar Jha vs The State of Bihar through Vigilance Investigation Bureau

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3705

PATNA HIGH COURT
Prabhat Kumar Singh, J
Pankaj Kumar Jha – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar through Vigilance Investigation Bureau – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64870 of 2025 | Special Case No. 42 of 2015

Important Points

Anticipatory bail can be granted when the charge-sheet is submitted and no further custodial interrogation is necessary.

Subject

Criminal Law - Anticipatory Bail

Act Referred

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: S.13

Headnote

This judgment concerns the grant of anticipatory bail under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner, who is accused of accumulating disproportionate assets, contends that he is innocent, and no custodial interrogation is necessary since a charge-sheet has been submitted. The court grants anticipatory bail, emphasizing conditions on cooperation during the trial and restrictions on leaving the state.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Satish Jha
For the Respondents: Mr. Arvind Kumar

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

4 08-12-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for offences punishable under Sections 13 (2) read with 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 .

3. As per the prosecution case, there is an allegation that the petitioner, during his service in the Co-operative Department of the Government of Bihar, accumulated disproportionate assets amounting to Rs. 1,44,16,336/- from illegal sources.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He further submits that, after investigation, the Vigilance Department has already submitted the charge-sheet in this case. As such, custodial interrogation is not required. There is no apprehension of tampering with evidence. Petitioner is above 65 years and is suffering from various ailments.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is allowed.

7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above-named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned P.O. (Special Court Vigilance), Patna, in connection with Special Case No. 42 of 2015 arising out of Vigilance P.S. Case No. 72 of 2015, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

(i) Petitioner shall co-operate into trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the trial court and shall remain physically present as directed by the trial court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the trial court.

(ii) If the petitioner is found tampering with the evidence or the witnesses in this case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iii) The petitioner shall surrender his Indian Passport before the trial court, if he is in possession of the same and without the permission of the trial court, he will not leave the State.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)