TARIQ HUSSAIN KHAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 09.04.2018 passed in G.R. No.993 of 2015 arising out of Adityapur P.S.Case No.347 of 2015 by which his application for discharge under section 239 Cr.P.C has been declined.

(2.) Contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner are; (i) the materials collected during the investigation, more particularly, the documents seized from the Housing Board during the investigation do not constitute essential ingredients for the offences punishable under section 467, 468, 471 and 420 r/w 34 IPC, (ii) there is no allegation that the petitioner has done or omitted to do something in the entire transaction in which it is alleged that the plot allotted in favour of Shiv Mangal Prasad Sinha has been transferred in the name of Binay Kumar who claimed himself son of the said allottee, and (iii) it is the prosecution's own case that the petitioner has committed the offence as alleged in course of discharge of his official duty and while so, without sanction under section 197 Cr.P.C the petitioner cannot be put on trial.

(3.) Mr. Amit Kumar Das, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the course of investigation neither parentage of the allottee was verified nor the Investigating Officer cared to verify parentage of the husband of the complainant-Kanti Kumari Sinha who has given a written complaint dated 10.10.2007. The learned counsel submits that the documents which have been seized by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation do not disclose any overt act by the petitioner.