Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. W.J.C. No.466 of 2012 ====================================================== Dinesh Chandra Jaiswal S/O J.R. Jaiswal Residing At 19, Goabagan Street, Police Station- Burtolla, District- Kolkata (West Bengal) .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna 2. The Senior Superintendent Of Police, Patna 3. The Superintendent Of Police, Rural, Patna 4. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Barh, Patna 5. The Officer-In-Charge, Pandarak Police Station, Patna 6. Dhirendra Singh S/O Late Baldeo Singh Resident Of Village- Laxmipur, Police Station- Pandarak, District- Patna .... .... Respondents ====================================================== ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA ORAL ORDER 3 04-06-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 8.2.2012, 24.3.2012 passed in Pandarak P.S.Case No. 54 of 2009 by A.C.J.M., Barh, whereunder pursuant to the requisition of the Officer-in-Charge, Pandarak P.S. dated 8.2.2012 warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioner in connection with Pandarak P.S.Case No. 54 of 2009 dated 6.5.2009 registered for the offences under [STATUTE] in connection with Dozer No. D-80-12-A old BIMAL bearing Dozer Engine No. NT 743 chassis no. 6354. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that considering the ownership document of the aforesaid Dozer, the same was released in favour of the petitioner by the A.C.J.M., Barh under orders dated 9.6.2011. Having released the Dozer but without noticing the said fact present order dated 8.2.2012, 24.3.2012 has been passed Patna High Court CR. WJC No.466 of 2012 (3) dt.04-06-2012 2 requisitioning the petitioner as an accused in the said case and warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioner. Let the petitioner file petition before the A.C.J.M., Barh highlighting the aforesaid aspect of the matter. A.C.J.M., Barh should reconsider his earlier order dated 8.2.2012, 24.3.2012 and pass appropriate order in the matter considering the request of the petitioner for recall of the aforesaid two orders in accordance with law. Application stands disposed of. Pravin/- (V.N. Sinha, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 467

Statute Text:
Section 467 of the Indian Penal Code. Forgery of a valuable security, will or authority to make or transfer any valuable security, or to receive any money, etc. Whoever forges a document which purports to be a valuable security or a will, or an authority to adopt a son, or which purports to give authority to any person to make or transfer any valuable security, or to receive the principal, interest or dividends thereon, or to receive or deliver any money, movable property, or valuable security, or any document purporting to be an acquittance or receipt acknowledging the payment of money, or an acquittance or receipt for the delivery of any movable property or valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.