PRAHLAD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) This application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the first information report of Barh P.S. Case No. 497 of 2018 registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

(3.) Mr. Vivekanand Vivek, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that as far as the petitioner is concerned, his implication in the instant case is false, concocted and not reliable. He has contended that from the averments made in the FIR no offence is made out against the petitioner. Hence, the investigation against him would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court. He has further contended that the petitioner was selected in N.C. Railway in the year 2008 as Senior Ticket Examiner (S.T.E.) but he resigned from the job. He was also selected as Junior Accounts Assistant in Delhi Secretariat, but he left that job. He has appeared in the Jharkhand Public Service Commission and Bihar Public Service Commission examination in which he has passed the preliminary test examination. His credentials are sufficient to show that he is not a man of dubious character. His involvement in the case would jeopardize his entire career.