Case Facts:
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.165 of 2012 (2) dt.27-02-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ No.165 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Haribansh Prasad @ Ashish Kumar S/O Mahendra Prasad Resident Of Village- Phulwaria, Police Station- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur, and Presently Posted as Jeep Khalasi, Divisional Railway Manager Office, Danapur .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The District Officer, Muzaffarpur 3. The Senior Additional Collector, Muzaffarpur 4. The District Education Officer, Muzaffarpur 5. District Programme Officer, Establishment Muzaffarpur 6. Block Education Officer, Meenapur, Muzaffarpur 7. Birkeshwar Prasad Singh, Chairman, Yachika Samiti, Bihar Vidhan Parishad, Patna 8. Rajesh Kumar, Director, Vetenary Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 9. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur 10The Officer - In- Charge or S.H.O. of Meenapur Police Station Muzaffarpur .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pradeep Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anant Kumar, A.C. to AAG II ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 2 27-02-2012 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the FIR No. 319/2011 dated 24.11.2011 under [STATUTE] lodged in Minapur Police Station, District Muzaffarpur by the informant, Block Education Officer, Minapur, District Muzffarpur. 2. It appears that an FIR was filed on 24.11.2011 on the allegation that the petitioner had submitted a forged and fabricated education certificate for the purpose of obtaining employment in Railways. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR is fit to be quashed considering that the application for lodging FIR has been given to the Officer Incharge on 12.11.2011 whereas the case has Patna High Court CR. WJC No.165 of 2012 (2) dt.27-02-2012 been registered against the petitioner after a lapse of 12 days. 3. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submits that the matter is at the investigation stage and it would be premature to look into the matter at this stage. It is stated that on the basis of a letter written by the Chairman of the Yachika Samiti, Bihar Vidhan Parishad the matter has moved through various level including the District Magistrte, Muzaffarpur, Senior Additional Collector, Senior Deputy Collector, District Education Officer, District Programme Officer and the Block Education Officer and which has finally culminated in the institution of the FIR. 4. This Court is of the view that it would be premature as the FIR has been instituted and the matter is still being investigated by the police. There appears to be little ground or justification for the petitioner to apprehend that the investigating officer would not carry out the investigation in accordance with law. 5. This petition accordingly stands disposed of. Chandran (Vikash Jain, 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.