Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.20024 of 2012 ====================================================== Pawan Kumar Yadav .... .... Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 3 16-07-2012 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Vigilance and original complainant. The petitioner being the then Panchayat Mukhiya is apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under [STATUTE] and Sections 7, 13(1)©, 13(1)(d) and 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Initial complaint was filed by Rabindra Kumar, a co- villager of the petitioner making accusation of committing illegality in execution of Indira Aawas scheme by withdrawing the benefits twice in the name of the same beneficiary and due to providing benefits to ineligible persons or the money was not given to the actual beneficiaries at all. The other accusation is of giving loan for the tractor to the tune of Rs.1,25,000/- to his own brother. It is also alleged that the price of different parts of the solar lights was not furnished and it was purchased at Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20024 of 2012 (3) dt.16-07-2012 2 higher price. It is also alleged that the petitioner made the construction encroaching the government land. The initial complaint was filed before the Special Judge, Vigilance who transmitted the same to the District Magistrate for enquiry when the District Magistrate got the enquiry conducted through S.D.O. It is submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the accusation with regard to Indira Aawas scheme as for the year 2003-2004 and 2007-2008, when the complaint has been filed in 2010 and the enquiry has been conducted in 2011, resulting into registration of the police case in 2011. Moreover, the accusation has to be considered in the background of the fact that the brother of the complainant contested the PACS election with the brother of the petitioner when Rosera P.S.Case No.178 of 2009 was lodged in which the brother of the complainant was in jail for considerable period, hence as retaliatory measure the present complaint was filed. It is further submitted that the S.D.O. during inquiry found only the part of the accusation true and I.O. has also recorded this fact that no substantive proof with regard to the irregularity has surfaced when the accusation has been levelled in the background of political rivalry. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20024 of 2012 (3) dt.16-07-2012 3 It is also submitted that grant of the loan to the brother of the petitioner constitutes no offence and the solar lights were purchased on approval of price by the executive committee when partial encroachment has been found on the Govt. land for which substantive remedy is available under Public Land Encroachment Act. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Vigilance that during course of investigation prima facie accusation has been found true and same is the contention of counsel for the complainant. Considering the fact that the accusation has been levelled by co-villager who was inimical with the petitioner when it is not alleged that the petitioner during inquiry by S.D.O. or investigation did not cooperate coupled with the fact that the accusation is for the period 2003-2004 and 2007, let the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today on furnishing bail bond Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Vigilance(North Bihar), Muzaffarpur in connection with Special Case No.37 of 2011 arising out of Rosera P.S.Case No.164 of 2011 subject to the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20024 of 2012 (3) dt.16-07-2012 4 conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. Anil/- (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.