PRIYABRATA MOHANTY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Government Advocate.

(2.) THE petitioner is apprehending arrest for the alleged commission of offences under Section 471, 467, 468/34 of the I.PC. in Sahid Nagar PS. Case No. 207 of 2014, corresponding to C.T. Case No. 1575 of 2014 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar.

(3.) IN course of hearing of the Bail Application, the petitioner's counsel brought to the notice of the Court that the seller, who executed the allegedly forged sale deed, produced the original sale deed executed by Rajalaxmi Promoters in favour of Dr. Saroj Kumar Mallik, the informant. He also produced the Record of Rights along with the rent receipt and believing the same the petitioner had bona fide impression that the person, who sold the land to him by executing the sale deed is in fact real owner of the property. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner himself has been duped by somebody and therefore he cannot be saddled with the criminal liability and deserves to be granted anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. Government Advocate, on the other hand, has stated in course of hearing that the present petitioner might have set up by a person to impersonate -the complainant Dr. S.K. Mallik in order to grab the landed property. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that from the seized Registered Sale Deed it is apparent that the informant is not the executants of the sale deed.