SHARDA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been presented before this Court after learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. Parmanand Prasad Nr. Sahi made a mention when the Court convered at 10.30 A.M. Counsel said it is a matter of urgency and the registry would not entertain the petition and instead has recorded an objection. The objection of the registry is re -produced below : This petition does not lie in Patna High Court jurisdiction as it arises from Mumbai Police Station. A writ may be filed at Mumbai High Court.

(2.) BELOW the objection of the registry counsel raised his counter objection, to the effect, that the writ petition is maintainable. The counter objection reads : ''The application is maintainable in the light of certain decision wherein it has been held that writ petition is maintainable at a place where apprehension of arrest arises and since the petitioners apprehend their arrest within jurisdiction of this Court. Hence the petition is maintainable. Let the case be placed before the Bench for decision of jurisdiction with defect.

(3.) THIS Court has gone through the text of the petition. Clearly, the petitioners are avoiding to appear before a Court in Mumbai where the petitioners acknowledge a First Information Report has been instituted with allegations for criminal breach of trust, criminal breach of trust by agent, forgery of valuable security, forgery for the purpose of cheating using genuine as a forged document, cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property by several persons in furtherance of common intention. The allegations are under sections 406, 408, 467, 468, 471 and 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners acknowledge that a First Information Report has been registered with Kidwai Marg Police Station, Mumbai, against case no. 8 of 1989. The petitioners also acknowledge that a case is pending in the Court of XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Dadar, Mumbai. The petitioners also mention that one Pawan, an Assistant Inspector of the Police Station at Mumbai, is the Investigating Officer. The petitioners also mention that they have engaged a very busy lawyer at Mumbai but the First Information Report is not being made available.