In a bail application, the Patna High Court considered arguments regarding the petitioner's alleged role as a security guard versus other evidence suggesting he occupied the flat where forged documents were recovered. The court declined to grant bail.
No bail was granted; the application to enlarge the petitioner on bail was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.11831 of 2014
Arising Out of P.S. Case No. -206 Year- 2013 Thana -PATRAKARNAGAR District- PATNA
====================================================== Jitendra Mishra, Son of Shree Birendra Nah Mishra, Resident of Bhitri Begumpur, P.S.- Chowk, Patna City, District and Town: Patna, Bihar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. D. Mehta, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL ORDER
5 21-07-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in Patrakarnagar P.S. Case No. 206 of 2013 dated 25.09.2013 instituted under Sections 420 / 465 / 466 / 467 / 468 / 471 / 473 / 474 /475 / 120-B / 34 / 124(A) / 255 / 256 / 257 / 258 / 259 / 260 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though allegation is that the petitioner has been caught from the flat from which forged stamp and other forged documents have been recovered but, according to him, he was working as a Security Guard in the Apartment and, that is why, only on suspicion, he has been arrested. Learned counsel has also drawn the attention of this Court to the letter of appointment of the petitioner by Vibhawan Manpower Services, which, according to
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11831 of 2014 (5) dt.21-07-2014
2/3
him, had posted him in the said Apartment as a Security Guard. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is in custody since 25.09.2013. It is further submitted that two other accused persons, who were arrested from different flats, have been released by the court below itself.
Learned A.P.P., upon going through the case diary, submits that the flat, from which forged stamp and other materials were recovered, was occupied by the petitioner as has come during the investigation and that from the statements of independent witnesses, it appears that he was caught from inside the said flat. It is further submitted that the appointment letter shows that the petitioner had been offered the post of Business Development Manager and, thus, he could not have been performing the duty of Security Guard in the Apartment. Learned A.P.P. submits that the other two persons, who have been released on bail, being caught in another Apartment, the premises did not belong to them and, in that case, the mastermind was Ranjit Kumar whereas, in the present case, it was the flat where the petitioner was living from which those articles have been recovered.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11831 of 2014 (5) dt.21-07-2014
3/3
However, the court below shall expedite the trial and
conclude the same within six months.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
Dilip.
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be enlarged on bail in a case involving alleged forgery and cheating.
Jitendra Mishra
The State of Bihar
Ahsanuddin Amanullah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
