Dismissed

Gorakh Nath Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC10 Feb 2022A.B.A./625/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Jharkhand rejected an application for anticipatory bail regarding forgery and cheating allegations. The court held that custodial interrogation was necessary due to the serious nature of the offences involving forged educational certificates.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for grant of anticipatory bail rejected; directed trial court to consider bail if petitioners surrender within four weeks.

Gorakh Nath Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 625 of 2022

¶2

Gorakh Nath Sharma

¶3

Shambhu Sarkar … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶4

------

¶5

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

For the Petitioners : Mr. D.K. Karmakar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, Addl. P.P.

¶7

------

¶8

Order No.02 Dated- 10.02.2022

¶9

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after resumption of the Court in physical mode.

¶11

In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

¶12

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Telco P.S. Case No.255 of 2016 registered under sections 419/420/ 467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners have committed forgery of their educational certificate by way of cheating and has got themselves employed with the Tata Motors Limited, Jamshedpur but on verification and after finding their educational certificate to be forged, they have been terminated from their employment. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the petitioners have not committed any offence. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶14

Learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation of committing forgery of

¶15

educational certificate, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required during the investigation of the case to find out the details of the forgery. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners ought not to be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶16

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners as well as the requirement of their custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above named petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail of the above named petitioners is rejected.

¶17

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners will surrender before the learned trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail.

¶18

In case, the petitioners surrender before the learned trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, the learned trial court is directed to consider the same without being prejudice by this order.

¶19

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶20

Sonu/Gunjan-

Gorakh Nath Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gorakh Nath Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Girdhari Lal Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Azad Sheikh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Prashant Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Binod Prasad Yadav Alias Binod Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Sarfaraj Ansari Alias MD Sarfaraj Vs the State of Jharkhand

Deepak Singh Alias D Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand