BHAGIRATH PRASAD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant revision application is directed against the order dated 6.9.2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad whereby the prayer of the petitioner for discharge under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C. was dismissed.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief is' that a case on the basis of an FIR of the Senior Post Master, Dhanbad was registered at Dhanbad Police Station on 16.7.2003 for the offences under Sections 419,420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code against the present petitioner. The allegation as contained in the first information report is that a lady claiming herself to be 8anti Verma of Jharia, accompanied by one Pradeep Singh approached the Senior Post Master, Dhanbad and presented a Indira Vikas Patra bearing LV.P. -44 -C 630244 purported to be issued by Patna G.P.O. On 9.3.1996 for a sum of Rs. 5,000/ - and which was to mature on 9.9.2001. An application signed in the name of 8anti Verma, for encashment of the amount of Indira Vikas Patra, was also enclosed with the documents. Both 8anti Verma and Pradeep Singh appended their respective signatures on the Indira Vikas Patra with their request for encashment. The Senior Post Master, Dhanbad referred the application alongwith the Indira Vikas Patra to the G.P.O., Patna for verification. A report was later received from the G.P.O., Patna stating that no such Indira Vikas Patra bearing the aforesaid number was ever issued on 9.3.1996. On the basis of the report and concluding that the document was a forged one, both the persons were detained by the Senior Post Master and on interrogation, the lady disclosed that her real name is Asha Devi and the person who accompanied her disclosed that his real name is 8hagirath Prasad. Subsequently, the police was informed and FIR was lodged, where after, both the persons were arrested. After concluding the investigation, the police submitted charge -sheet recommending trial of both the accused persons including the present petitioner, for the offences mentioned above. After taking cognizance of the offences, learned trial court proceeded to fix a date for framing charge. The petitioner filed a petition for his discharge on the ground that on the basis of the entire allegations in the FIR and the evidences collected in course of investigation, no offence whatsoever is made out against either of the accused persons at all. The learned court below dismissed the prayer holding that a prima facie case is made out against the accused persons including the present petitioner for the said offences.

(3.) COUNSEL for the State controverts the grounds advanced by the petitioner and submits that from the facts stated in the FIR and confirmation thereto obtained on investigation, a prima facie, case is made out against both the accused persons for the offences under Sections 419 and 420 of the IPC and also for the offences under Sections 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC.