Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.42632 of 2011 ====================================================== 1.Ram Naresh Rai, Son of Fakira Rai. 2.Siyaram Mahato, Son of Late Chhathu Mahato. 3.Dharm Nath Gupta, Son of Late Baidyanath Gupta. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA ORAL ORDER 3 21-03-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the complainant-informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, who is armed with carbon/xerox copy of the case diary up to paragraph 43 – dated 31/05/2010. Out of total three petitioners, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this application with respect to petitioner no. 1, namely, Ram Naresh Rai as he has already been apprehended by the police. Permission is granted. Accordingly, this application with respect to petitioner no. 1 stands disposed of as withdrawn as having become infructuous. Remaining two petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with a case registered for the offence punishable under [STATUTE] , are respectively named accused in this case, instituted on basis of Complaint Case No. 148 of 2007 being deed writer and witness to a sale-deed said to be executed by impersonation of one of the three brothers and another brother is identifier of the said execution. Submission is of false implication and one title suit bearing Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42632 of 2011 (3) dt.21-03-2012 2 / 2 2 no. 168 of 2008 is already pending for the same subject in the Court of learned Sub-Judge, Sitamarhi at the instance of complainant-informant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within four weeks, let the above named petitioner nos. 2 & 3 be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in connection with Dumara P.S. Case No. 85 of 2008, subject to condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with additional condition to remain physically present before the court below till disposal of the case and in case of failure on two consecutive dates without giving any reasonable explanation, the liberty granted shall be deemed to be cancelled. Praveen-II/- (Akhilesh Chandra, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 471

Statute Text:
Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Using as genuine a forged document which is known to be forged. Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any document which he knows or has reason to believe to be a forged document, shall be punished in the same manner as if he had forged such document.