Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.13486 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Vinay Kumar Choubey S/O Ram Kailash Choubey Resident of Village- Mahuli, P.S.- Udwant Nagar, District- Bhojpur .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Vijay Bahadur Singh S/O Late Harsu Singh Resident of Village- Adarsh Nagar Buxar, P.S.- Buxar (Town), District- Buxar .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 3 09-05-2012 Heard Mr. Digvijay Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.N. Shukla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner has questioned the order dated 18.01.2012 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar in a case arising from Buxar (Town) P.S. Case No. 208 of 2011 whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has been pleased to take cognizance of the offences punishable under [STATUTE] . The petitioner happens to be the guard in the District Court at Buxar. The allegation set out in the F.I.R. relates to destruction of some of the criminal records and it is in this connection this petitioner in the capacity of the guard of the District Court at Buxar along with some other have been arrayed as accused. Although learned counsel for the petitioner very vehemently canvassed to demonstrate that even while the petitioner happens to be guard of the Civil Court, he was assigned the duty of a different Court building and that the destruction of Court records could not be attributed to him. It is contended that the duty of maintenance and preservation of Court records, is Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.13486 of 2012 (3) dt.09-05-2012 2 / 2 2 on the bench clerk and the person(s) attached to the Court concerned. It is further submitted that it is not the allegation that the records were stolen or were destroyed after breaking into the premises rather there is a specific mention that the records was destroyed by Monkeys. In the aforesaid circumstances a prayer for indulgence has been made inter alia on grounds that the offence allegedly is totally unconnected with the duty of the petitioner, as a guard. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the materials on record, this Court is of the opinion that the contention as advanced by the petitioner before this Court are issues which may be raised by him, at the stage of framing of charge and which may be considered and disposed of by the Court concerned in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observation this application stands disposed of. Bibhash/- (Jyoti Saran, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 204

Statute Text:
Section 204 of the Indian Penal Code. Secreting or destroying any document to prevent its production as evidence. Whoever secrets or destroys any document which he may be lawfully compelled to produce as evidence in a Court of Justice, or in any proceeding lawfully held before a public servant, as such, or obliterates or renders illegible the whole or any part of such document with the intention of preventing the same from being produced or used as evidence before such Court or public servant as aforesaid, or after he shall have been lawfully summoned or required to produce the same for that purpose, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.