Allowed

Mithilesh Singh v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC7 Dec 2023/3509/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous matter arising from allegations of cheating and forgery under multiple IPC sections, the Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, an LIC agent, subject to conditions ensuring his presence in court and furnishing of a bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties each, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.

Mithilesh Singh Vs the State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3509 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-2021 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Mithilesh Singh, aged about 60 years (Male), Son of Late Mathura Singh, Resident of Village - Sipaha, P.S.- Deepnagar, Distt.- Nalanda.

¶5

... ... Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar.

¶8

Sri Suresh Kumar Sanee, at present Chief Manager, L.I.C. of India, at Biharsharif Branch, District and Town-Bihar Sarif (Nalanda), Bihar. Permanent Address- House No. 280, Sector 3, Urban Estate, Kuruchetra, P.S. Pipli, District-Kuruchetra, Haryana.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate and Mr. Anil Kumar Roy,Advocate For the O.P. No. 2 : M/S. Rakesh Kumar, Rajni Kant Singh and Manish Kumar, Advocates For the State : Mr. Narsingh Tanti, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

17 07-12-2023

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

¶14

Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3509 of 2022(17) dt.07-12-2023 2/7

¶17

connection with Laheri P.S. Case No. 143 of 2021, dated 04.04.2021 for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

As per the prosecution case, it is alleged that one Sunil Kumar had a Term Insurance Policy No. 847679979 of Rs. 15,00,000/- dated 18.12.2016 which was to be matured on 28.12.2031 in which his wife Sabi Devi was made nominee. After his death, all the documents have been duly verified, attested and witnesses were deposed in the office of L.I.C. for his death claim. It is further alleged that on the basis of the order dated 27.11.2020, passed by competent authority, Rs. 15,00,000/- was transferred in the Bank A/C No. 69880100013703 of Sabi Devi. On 22.01.2021, the Manager of Bihar Gramin Bank informed that two persons are making the death claim. During inquiry, it came to light that the accused-petitioner Mithilesh Singh, Agent Code-07624522 is the agent of the said policy and all the relevant documents were produced by him and the same was duly signed by nominee, agent and Development Manager and subsequently the claimed amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- was withdrawn with the co-

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3509 of 2022(17) dt.07-12-2023 3/7

¶20

operation of the concerned Bank. It is further alleged that Anil Kumar, S/O Rupam Mahto is the master mind in the whole game and the same was done under conspiracy with Mithilesh Singh (petitioner). Apart from that it is further alleged that illegal game has been practiced in the following

¶21

policies.

¶22

Policy No. Name Address Age Policy Amt.
847679979 Sunil Kr. S/O Sri Om Prakash 39 15,00,000/-
595783582 Indal Paswan S/O Ramashish 32 2,00,000/-
528158829 Tuntun Ram S/O Sri Balak Ram 43 2,00,000/-
559833901 Reena Devi Previous W/O Anil Kr.38 4,38,850/-
595781642 Ramavtar Mahto S/O Suraj Mahto 51 2,00,000/-
595781641 Ramavtar Mahto S/O Suraj Mahto 51 1,40,000/-
559902748 Anil Kr. S/O Rupam Mahto 43 4,83,150/-
595781958 Sharmila Devi S/O Prv. W/O Rupam 51 2,00,000/-
829240103 Amardeep Kr. S/O Anil Kr. 10,00,000/-
847744800 Jitendra Kr. S/O Late Munarik 31 15,00,000/-
829087126 Vijay Mistry S/O Bhaju Mistri 36 10,00,000/-
829360567 Gulabi DeviW/O Sri Kapildev Mahto54 3,00,000/-

¶23

It is further alleged that Anil Kumar, H/O Rina Devi willingly received Rs. 4,38, 850/- on 21.06.2019 as death claim of Rina Devi though Rina Devi is alive and Anil Kumar had submitted document. It is also alleged that the age of Indal Paswan and Tuntun Ram, Policy Holder of Policy No. 595783582 and 528158829 respectively were not carefully entered on the form and death claims were obtained on the basis of forged paper showing false age, though no person of the aforesaid age and name is present.

¶24

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3509 of 2022(17) dt.07-12-2023 4/7

¶26

submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is an agent of L.I.C. for the last twenty years and till today no complaint has been made against him. It is submitted that after death of Sunil Kumar, Policy Holder No. 847679979, his nominee Sabi Devi prepared the death claim application which was carefully verified by the petitioner and put his signature on it. From perusal of the confidential report of the petitioner being an agent, it appears that the petitioner had also informed by some co-villagers that Sunil Kumar, policy holder, had died due to road accident. Thereafter, he personally enquired and verified the F.I.R., death certificate, passbook of nominee Sabi Devi then he signed on the claim form and also gave confidential report although he has not saw the dead body of Sunil Kumar rather it is the duty of police or L.I.C. to enquire the truthness of death of policy holder. Learned counsel has referred to para 5 of the reply to the counter affidavit dated 02.01.2023 and submitted that prior to filing of the present case, the petitioner himself filed an application before the Senior Manager, L.I.C. Biharshariff on 25.01.2021 at 10.30 A.M., for seizure of Rs.

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3509 of 2022(17) dt.07-12-2023 5/7

¶28

15,00,000/- which is death claim of Late Sunil Kumar. Thereafter, on the same day, a letter was given to the petitioner by him to submit a complete list of all policies that were done by him and in obedience to the aforesaid letter, the petitioner furnished a detailed report regarding the policies done by him. As far as other allegations levelled against the petitioner are concerned, the same are totally false and concocted. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out at para 10 of the 2^nd reply of the counter affidavit dated 27.02.2023, by submitting that L.I.C. has been wrongly stated that crores of rupees has been defalcated by the petitioner. It is further submitted that the amount of embezzlement done by the petitioner is not mentioned in the F.I.R. Moreover, there is a general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail application.

¶29

Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶30

Learned counsel counsel for the opposite party

¶31

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3509 of 2022(17) dt.07-12-2023 6/7

¶32

no. 2 (L.I.C. of India) has filed counter affidavit on 16.12.2022, in which it was mentioned that the petitioner and Anil Kumar were engaged in purchasing different policies on the basis of forged and fabricated documents, later on, the three life assured were neither found alive nor had any existence. In para 10, it has been mentioned that total amount of defalcation has been ascertained to be Rs. 1,11,46,300/-, and many more policies are under investigation. Further, in para 12, it has been mentioned that in connection with the said four policies, Rs. 15,00,000/lakhs has been recovered out of Rs. 27,72,609/-.

¶33

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as finding some merit in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner and the allegation being general and omnibus against the petitioner, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Biharsharif at Nalanda, in connection with

¶34

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3509 of 2022(17) dt.07-12-2023 7/7

¶35

Laheri P.S. Case No. 143 of 2021, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with further condition:-

¶36

(I) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bonds of the petitioner are liable to be cancelled.

¶37

The application stands allowed.

¶38

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶39

U.K./- U T

Mithilesh Singh v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithilesh Singh v. the State of Bihar

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

Deepak Verma Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Irfan Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dhiraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kumar Rai @ Raj Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sahmad Raja Vs The State of Bihar