Dismissed¶22

Saket Kumar Jha @ Saket Jha v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Feb 2025CR. MISC./56508/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Saket Kumar Jha @ Saket Jha - anticipatory bail refused - Patna HC Cr. Misc. 56508/2024 (order dt.05-02-2025, Justice Dr. Anshuman) - Kotwali P.S. Case 273/2024, Patna - cheating/criminal breach of trust/forgery conspiracy, Sections 420/406/467/468/471/120B IPC - petitioner Assistant Legal Manager of Insurance Company (Motor Vehicle Accident Claims, Bihar-Jharkhand in-charge) - co-accused lawyer Ashutosh Kumar Jha's anticipatory bail earlier rejected (Cr. Misc. 61438/2024, order dt.11.09.2024) - surrender within four weeks; regular bail to be considered without prejudice.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief granted: anticipatory bail refused. Conditional assurance that upon surrender of the petitioner within four weeks, the prayer for regular bail shall be considered without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

Saket Kumar Jha @ Saket Jha Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner, Saket Kumar Jha @ Saket Jha, who is apprehending arrest in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No.273 of 2024 (offences under Sections 420/406/467/468/471/120B IPC), given his alleged role as Assistant Legal Manager of the organisation defrauded and the earlier rejection of anticipatory bail of co-accused Ashutosh Kumar Jha.

¶10

Court's answer

Anticipatory bail is refused: in the background of the fraud allegations and the Court's earlier rejection of anticipatory bail of co-accused Ashutosh Kumar Jha (the lawyer), this Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

Conditional direction attached: in the event the petitioner surrenders within four weeks, his prayer for regular bail shall be considered without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Dr. Anshuman, J), Criminal Miscellaneous No.56508 of 2024, order dated 05-02-2025 arising out of Kotwali P.S. Case No.273 of 2024 (Patna, lodged 23.04.2024): anticipatory bail application of Saket Kumar Jha @ Saket Jha, described in the FIR as Assistant Legal Manager of the organisation where the fraud was allegedly committed and said to be in connivance with other accused persons. Offences: Sections 420/406/467/468/471/120B IPC; FIR names seven accused. Petitioner's counsel argued he was innocent scapegoat, posted at Patna handling Motor Vehicle Accident Claim matters, in-charge for Bihar and Jharkhand, whose internal report showed six of eight collected documents forged; counsel for the Informant/Insurance Company countered that investigators' statements (case-diary paragraphs 20-21) show reports were conveyed to him orally, in writing and by e-mail; State counsel relied on this Court's order dated 11.09.2024 in Cr. Misc. No.61438 of 2024 rejecting anticipatory bail of co-accused lawyer Ashutosh Kumar Jha. Anticipatory bail refused; however, upon surrender within four weeks, the prayer for regular bail shall be considered without being prejudiced by this order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56508 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-273 Year-2024 Thana- KOTWALI District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Saket Kumar Jha @ Saket Jha Son Of Binay Chandra Jha Resident of S.D.O Road, Noongola Hajipur Vaishali P.S- Hajipur District- Hajipur At Vaishali

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mrs.Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP For the Informant : Mr. Durgesh Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶8

6 05-02-2025

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Informant, who sue motu appears in this case, and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶10

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No.273 of 2024, lodged on 23.04.2024, for the offences punishable under Sections 420/406/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶11

As per the prosecution, the FIR has been lodged against seven named accused persons including the present petitioner. It has been alleged in the FIR that

¶12

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56508 of 2024(6) dt.05-02-2025 2/5

¶13

petitioner, who is the Assistant Legal Manager in the Organization, where fraud has alleged to have been committed, and allegation is that he in connivance with other accused persons have committed the said fraud, which was subsequently surfaced at the level of the Investigators to whom this matter was handed over for investigation and when came to the knowledge of the headquarter this case has been filed.

¶14

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that petitioner was working as Assistant Legal Manager posted at Patna in the wing of Motor Vehicle Accident Claim matter. He was made in-charge of Bihar and Jharkhand. He submits that the Company used to appoint lawyer for defending the Company’s case, selection of empanelment of lawyer used to be made at the level of Headquarter Office, Mumbai. He submits that for district Madhubani and Sheohar one lawyer Mr. Ashutosh Jha represented the Company. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that as soon as the petitioner has received this information about the said illegality, he has submitted the document to the Headquarter and thereafter Company has

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56508 of 2024(6) dt.05-02-2025 3/5

¶16

constituted a separate investigating team. The said team was headed by the Company employee posted at Zonal Office. The petitioner has also provided information as demanded by Investigating Manager. He submits that Investigating Manager has prepared a report and it was found that the collected documents six out of eight cases are forge, on the basis of which the case has been filed in which petitioner has also been made accused only due to the reason that he was the Branch Manager of Bihar and Jharkhand. There is no direct involvement of the petitioner in the present case. Counsel submits that case-diary has been called for and from the casediary it transpires that the petitioner is completely innocent and he become the scapegoat in this case. Antecedent of the petitioner is clean.

¶17

Learned Counsel for the Informant/Insurance Company vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that petitioner is the Assistant Legal Manager of the Company and at that very relevant period of time, he was not only the Manager rather In-charge of the Investigating Team Manager also. Therefore, he cannot say at this level that he is completely innocent and he is not aware of such fraud. He submits that in the case-diary, particularly, the evidences of

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56508 of 2024(6) dt.05-02-2025 4/5

¶19

the Investigators made in paragraphs-20 and 21 i.e., the statement of the Investigating Officer. It become crystal clear that whatever be the report even slightest has been orally informed to him on phone and subsequently informed through paper to him. In this regard, the report was sent through mail also to the petitioner as well as to the headquarter. Therefore, at this level that he is innocent and there is absolutely no involvement of the petitioner may not be accepted and at least petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

¶20

In response thereof, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that these Investigators are not independent investigator; rather they are those investigators on whose instance and report the payment has been made.

¶21

Learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that this Court vide order dated 11.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.61438 of 2024 has rejected the anticipatory bail of other co-accused Ashutosh Kumar Jha, who is the lawyer, in such matters and according to him he has received all documents from the Manger.

¶22

In this background, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is refused. However, in the event of surrender

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56508 of 2024(6) dt.05-02-2025 5/5

¶24

of the petitioner within four weeks, the prayer for regular bail shall be considered without being prejudiced by the order of

¶25

this Court.

¶26

(Dr. Anshuman, J)

¶27

Mkr./-

¶28

U T

Saket Kumar Jha @ Saket Jha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saket Kumar Jha @ Saket Jha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harischandra Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Quashim and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Seema Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Subedar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Kaushalya Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Kumar @ Mata Saw @ Mata Vs The State of Bihar