Prabhat Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11519 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-617 Year-2018 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria ====================================================== PRABHAT KUMAR Son of Late Uday Kumar Paswan, Resident of VillageLabhgaon, P.S.- Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Baleshwar Kamat For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-06-2022 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Khagaria (Chitragupta Nagar) P.S. Case No. 617 of 2018 registered for offence punishable under sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per allegation, the petitioner is a suspended Clerk in Revenue Department and at the relevant time, he was posted in the office of D.C.L.R., Khagaria. As per allegation, he was incharge of issue letter registers and he in his own handwriting issued a letter putting thereon forged signature of the then Deputy Collector-cum-D.D.C., Khagaria, Mr. Abdul Wahab Ansari.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11519 of 2019(14) dt.21-06-2022 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the entire allegation is false. By act of the petitioner, none has sustained wrongful loss neither the petitioner obtained any wrongful gain.

This criminal miscellaneous petition was filed in the year 2019 and after several correspondence made to the learned court below as well as the Forensic Science Laboratory, the report of Forensic Science Laboratory has been received, which has been kept at flag 'M'. Paragraph 16 of that report shows that the initials put on disputed document and the specimen documents were written by two different writers, which shows that the petitioner, who was in-charge of issuing letters, hold the signature of the then D.C.L.R., Mr. Abdul Wahab Ansari. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, I do not find it a case for anticipatory bail and accordingly the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Mahesh/- U T