Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.23445 of 2012 ====================================================== Hare Krishna Roy .... .... Petitioner. Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 10-07-2012 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under [STATUTE] . The accusation is of collecting huge amount of money on pretext of providing employment. Earlier prayer for anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was permitted to be withdrawn on 21.01.2003 vide Cr. Misc. No. 26927 of 2002. Prayer for anticipatory bail has been renewed on the ground that subsequently final form was submitted and cognizance was taken on 03.10.2002 and the petitioner challenged the cognizance order before this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 35891 of 2002 in which further proceeding pending in the learned Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23445 of 2012 (2) dt.10-07-2012 2 / 2 2 court below was stayed. Subsequently, the application was finally heard and dismissed on 06.10.2010 by this Hon’ble Court. This Court is not inclined to take a different view but considering the fact that accusation was found false and other accused Pradeep Kumar Moitra has been granted regular bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc. no. 1561 of 2004, this Court sees no reason for the learned court below not to give the same privilege to the petitioner if the petitioner surrenders within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order in connection with Saharsa P.S. Case No. 97 of 2002(G. R. No. 529 of 2002) pending in the court of the learned S.D.J.M., Saharsa. It is expected that prayer for regular bail application of the petitioner shall be disposed off preferably on the same day. With this observation, the application is disposed off. Let the order be faxed to the learned court below at the cost of the petitioner. U.K./- (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 468

Statute Text:
Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code. Forgery for the purpose of cheating. Whoever commits forgery, intending that the document forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.