Back
2016 Supreme(Jhk) 1662
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANANT BIJAY SINGH, J.
Vishnu Prasad Rai & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand, through the C.B.I. etc. - Opposite Parties
A.B.A. Nos. 4303, 4594, 4501, 4269, 3873, 4499, 3779, 2387, 3792, 3777, 3856, 3855 of 2015; 191, 969, 856, 1067 & 555 of 2016
Decided On : 03-10-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: M/s Ritu Kumar, A.K. Choudhary, J. Mazumdar, V.K. Trivedi, O.N. Tiwary, Indrajit Sinha, Arpan Mishra, Gautam Rakesh, S.N. Tiwari, Vineet Prakash
For the C.B.I. : Mr. K.P. Deo
Headnote:
Anticipatory Bail - Land Scam - IPC, P.C. Act, 1988, Santhal Pargana Regulation-II, 1886, Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act - Sections 423/424/467/468/469/471/477-A/419/420/409/506/201/120-B/109 IPC, Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act, 1988, Section 25(A) of Santhal Pargana Regulation-II, 1886, Section 53 of Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act
Fact of the Case:
The case involves a land scam in Jharkhand, where the accused, including public servants and private individuals, are alleged to have engaged in fraudulent activities related to non-transferable government land.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that some of the accused were involved in fraudulent activities related to land records and sale deeds, while others were not found to have sufficient evidence against them. The court directed fourteen petitioners to surrender before the concerned Court within five weeks and granted them bail with certain conditions. However, the court rejected the anticipatory bail for three petitioners due to the seriousness of the allegations against them.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused were involved in fraudulent activities related to non-transferable government land and whether they were eligible for anticipatory bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the evidence collected by the C.B.I and the cooperation of the accused during the investigation to determine the grant of anticipatory bail. The seriousness of the allegations and the role of each petitioner were crucial factors in the court's decision.
Final Decision: The court directed fourteen petitioners to surrender before the concerned Court within five weeks and granted them bail with certain conditions. However, the court rejected the anticipatory bail for three petitioners due to the seriousness of the allegations against them.
Since these anticipatory bail applications arise out of the same case i.e. R.C. Case No. 16(A)/2012-D, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, C.B.I, Dhanbad, the same are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.
2. The petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with the case registered under Sections 423/424/467/468/469/471/477-A/419/420/409/506/201/120-B/109 IPC, Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act, 1988, Section 25(A) of Santhal Pargana Regulation-II, 1886 and Section 53 of Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.
3. This case was registered on the basis of the written complaint dated 31.10.2011 of Shri Raj Kumar Lakra, S.P, I/c, Vigilance Bureau, Ranchi regarding the alleged land scam in District-Deoghar of Jharkhand. At the request of the Government of Jharkhand, the investigation of this case was taken over by the C.B.I. After completion of the investigation, the C.B.I submitted the final form.
Allegation against the petitioners
A.B.A. No. 4303 of 2015
4. The petitioner-Vishnu Prasad Rai was working as Karamchari in Halka No.02 under Mohanpur Circle, Deoghar between 19.11.2005 to 30.01.2008. The entries in Register-II of Baijnathpur mauza regarding jamabandi No. 42/5 and 42/6 and dishonestly issue of rent receipt No. 1007422 and 1007423 both dated 22.01.2008 in favour of Deb Narayan Parihast accused was made during his tenure and was the custodian of all the revenue records.
A.B.A. No. 4594 of 2015
5. The petitioner-Kamleshwari Prasad Singh was working as Record Keeper in District Record Room, Deoghar since 31.05.06 to 30.11.10. He was required to ensure that certified copies of the genuine records available in the record room are issued. But certified copy of fake forged record of mutation case No. 8/54-55 of Circle Office, Deoghar and Misc. Case No. 26/83-84 of Dasrath Rai & Ors. were issued from District Record Room, Deoghar under his signature and stamp.
A.B.A. No. 4501 of 2015
6. The petitioner-Jitendra Singh was working as Nazir in the Circle Office, Mohanpur, Deoghar in 2008 and was the custodian of rent receipt books. The Book of Rent Receipt bearing No. 38/07-09 from serial number 1007401 to 1007450 was issued to Sri Suresh Chandra Mandal (not Karamchari of Baijnathpur mauza) who had returned the same to him (Jitendra Kumar Singh) whose acknowledgement/receipt to that effect is available in the register. It is to be mentioned that the rent receipts Nos. 1007422 and 1007423 dated 22.01.2008 were illegally issued and are mentioned in the Index-II of Baijnathpur mauza in respect of JB No. 42/5 and 42/6. But the rent receipt Vol-38/07-08 is not available in the Circle Office, Mohanpur.
A.B.A. No. 4269 of 2015
7. The petitioner-Kishan Deo Das was working as Head Clerk in Circle Office, Mohanpur, Deoghar during December 2006 to 20.01.2009. Memo Nos. 35/ra and 36/ra both dated 31.12.2007 signed by accused Birender Kumar Rai and addressed to accused Madhusudan Jha for issue of rent receipt in favour of accused Deb Narayan Parihast were dishonestly prepared and issued by him knowingly well that accused Madhusudan Jha had already retired from service in October 2007.
A.B.A. No. 3873 of 2015
8. The petitioner-Virender Bhardwaj too, on the basis of Power of Attorney along with accused Kanhaiya Jha and accused Rakesh Ranjan dishonestly executed two sale deeds No. 588 & 589 both dated 14.03.2011 related to sale of non-transferable land.
A.B.A. No. 191 of 2016
9. The petitioner-Maheshwari Devi (mother of accused Dhrub Narayan Parihast) has executed many sale deeds as vendor and sold/transferred non-transferable Government land and she is beneficiary of fruits of crime by way of receiving payments through her Bank account in criminal conspiracy with her accused son.
A.B.A. No. 4499 of 2015
10. The petitioner-Dinesh Kumar Mishra was working as Revenue Karamchari in Mohanpur Circle, Deoghar during the period 2003 to 2011. He had fraudulently/dishonestly furnished fals
