BIKASH MISHRA @ VIKASH MISHRA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners Bikash Mishra @ Vikash Mishra and Sandeep Mishra have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the order dated 22.5.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro in Cr. Appeal No. 9 of 2009 by which finding of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat in Misc. Case No. 12 of 2008 after conducting an enquiry under Section 340 of Code of Criminal Procedure and holding prima facie offence alleged against the petitioners under Sections 419/467/468/471 read with 120B/34 IPC was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed.

(2.) THE short fact of the case is that Petarwar P.S. Case No. 41 of 2008 was registered against the driver, khalasi and owner of the truck no. MP -07B -7653 which was intercepted by the police, found carrying seven tons of coal illegally at the bridge of New Market, Tenughat. During course of investigation, the Investigating Officer filed a requisition for issuance of warrant of arrest against the petitioner No. 2 Sandeep Mishra who was the owner of the said truck and when the police raided the house, his father i.e. petitioner No. 1 Bikash Mishra @ Vikash Mishra disclosed that the truck in question was already sold by his son Sandeep Kumar Mishra to one Nagendra Pandey @ Narendra Pandey. In the meantime, one person surrendered in the Court of ACJM, Tenughat in the name of Sandeep Kumar Mishra claiming to be an accused in connection with Petarwar P.S. Case No. 41 of 2008 and he was taken into the judicial custody. Within a few days an affidavit was filed by the petitioner No.1 Bikash Mishra informing the learned ACJM, Tenughat regarding fraud played by some impostor who surrendered in the court in. the name of Sandeep Kumar Mishra. On such disclosure the petitioner No. 1 Bikash Mishra was directed by the ACJM to produce his son for ascertaining the identity of original Sandeep Kumar Mishra and accordingly, he was produced. 'Show cause' were issued to impostor Sandeep Kumar Mishra who was in judicial custody as also against one Narendra Pandey who had identified the impostor as Sandeep Kumar Mishra in vakalatnama. Separate notices were issued to the petitioners also who explained their defence. After holding preliminary enquiry under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. by drawing Misc. Case No. 12 of 2008, the learned ACJM, Tenughat after enquiry and on appreciating the causes shown by the petitioners and two others, by a detailed order found a prima facie case against them to proceed for the offence under Sections 419/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code and it was affirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro.

(3.) MR . Atanu Banerjee, the learned counsel, at the outset submitted that the petitioner No. 1 Bikash Mishra @ Vikash Mishra when came to learn that an impostor surrendered in the name of his son Sandeep Mishra who was the owner of the truck in question, intercepted by the police, he under bona fide belief filed an affidavit before the ACJM, Bermo at Tenughat stating that some impostors had surrendered in the name of his son Sandeep Mishra and on the direction made by the learned ACJM he immediately produced his son Sandeep Mishra before the court and in that manner it could not have been held that the petitioners were the parties to the conspiracy hatched by putting one stranger in the dock to appear in the name of San deep Mishra on certain allurement of monetary gain instead.