Back
2022 Supreme(Jhk) 836
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Hitesh Jain alias R. Hitesh Jain, S/o. Rajendra Kumar Jain - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. - Opposite Parties
Cr. M.P. No. 2150 of 2017
Decided On : 20-06-2022
For the Petitioner: Mr. Keshav Murty, Mr. Amritansh Vats, Mr. K. Priyam.
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Spl.P.P., Mr. R. R. Tiwari.
At the stage of investigation, Cr.P.C 195 has no application, and the parameters for quashing the FIR were not met.
Headnote:
Forgery - Criminal Proceeding - IPC 420, IPC 471, Cr.P.C 195 - The court discussed the allegations of forged signature and fabricating documents against the petitioner, the applicability of IPC sections 420 and 471, and the relevance of Cr.P.C 195. The court emphasized that at the stage of investigation, Cr.P.C 195 has no application and dismissed the petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition to quash the criminal proceeding based on allegations of forged signature and fabricating documents against the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the investigation was still ongoing and that the parameters for quashing the FIR were not met in this case.
Issues: Allegations of forged signature and fabricating documents, applicability of IPC sections 420 and 471, relevance of Cr.P.C 195.
Ratio Decidendi: At the stage of investigation, Cr.P.C 195 has no application, and the parameters for quashing the FIR were not met.
Final Decision: The petition to quash the criminal proceeding was dismissed, and the interim order was vacated.
Case Overview
- Petitioner sought to quash criminal proceedings arising from Town Police Station, Daltonganj P.S. Case No.84/2017, corresponding to G.R. Case No.753/2017, pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau. [20000313600001][20000313600002]
- FIR lodged by O.P. No.2 alleging petitioner forged signature of Ms. Khushboo Singh on an agreement submitted in bail application in another case, with intent to cheat, trouble, and mislead the court. [20000313600002]
- O.P. No.2 claimed no agreement existed, signature was fake, informed by father Shri Sripati Singh, and photocopy of agreement provided for signature verification. [20000313600002]
Petitioner's Arguments
- Petitioner learned of case during court appearance in another matter; police misconduct noted, court reprimanded officer. [20000313600003]
- Detailed affidavit filed denying fabrication; prior cases against petitioner had IPC 420 dropped by Supreme Court, leaving trial under NI Act S.138. [20000313600003]
- At best, case under IPC 471; S.195 Cr.P.C. applies, barring cognizance; FSL Kolkata required originals for opinion; O.P. No.2's private FSL Pune report irrelevant. [20000313600003]
- Cited prior court order in Cr.M.P. No.2374/2017 noting FIR sets investigation in motion. [20000313600003]
Opposite Parties' Arguments
- O.P. No.2: Forgery allegations under investigation; petition for FSL Kolkata verification rejected, challenged; re-examination ordered by ADJ Daltonganj (disputed by petitioner). [20000313600004]
- State: No further investigation due to interim stay from 22.08.2017; urges petitioner cooperation for early conclusion. [20000313600005]
Court's Analysis and Decision
- FIR discloses forgery and fabrication allegations against O.P. No.2; investigation ongoing, no charge sheet filed. [20000313600006]
- Applicability of IPC 420/471 subject to investigation; S.195 Cr.P.C. inapplicable at investigation stage. [20000313600006]
- Prior order in Cr.M.P. No.2374/2017 (06.09.2017) affirmed FIR triggers investigation by agency. [20000313600006]
- Parameters for quashing FIR not met; petition dismissed, interim order vacated, pending I.As. disposed. [20000313600006][20000313600007][20000313600008][20000313600009]
Advocates
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Keshav Murty, the learned counsel appearing along with Mr. Amritansh Vats the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ravi Prakash, the learned counsel for the respondent State and Mr. R.R. Tiwary, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P.No.2.
2. This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Town Police Station, Daltonganj P.S.Case No.84/2017, corresponding to G.R.Case No.753/2017, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau.
3. The First Information Report was lodged by the O.P.No.2 alleging therein that two cases are already pending against the petitioner which were filed by her father Shri Sripati Singh; that the petitioner was sent to jail under the charges u/s 420 IPC by the learned Chief Judicial Magistate, through a warrant and the petitioner has submitted an application for bail; that the petitioner, in the bail application is the first party and Ms. Khushboo Singh is the second party in an agreement in which the signature of Ms. Khushboo Singh has been shown. Whereas, Ms. Khushboo Singh contends that she has not entered into any sort of agreement with the petitioner; that the petitioner has forged and faked the documents, in which the forged signature of Ms. Khushboo Singh is shown, with the objective of troubling, cheating and damaging Ms Khushboo Singh and to take advantage in the case filed by the father and with the intention to mislead the Hon'ble Court; that Ms. Khushboo Singh was informed about the alleged agreement by her father, Shri Sripati Singh, over phone and when her father asked if she has entered into any kind of agreement with the petitioner then she told her father that she has not entered into any agreement with the petitioner. When she received the copy of the agreement by mail, she saw that her signature on the document is fake and forged; that the bail application which is submitted by the petitioner, which is also given to the advocate of the father of Ms. Khushboo attached to the agreement, it can be clearly seen that the document is fake and forged in which the signature of Ms. Khushboo is also fake and forged. It can be clearly seen that the petitioner has an objective of damaging and causing troubles to Ms. Khushboo Singh by forging her signature; that the petitioner in future also can do this type of forgery and causing of troubling Ms. Khushboo and with the objective of causing fraud, can do this type of forgery and faking of signature and make documents to his use; that Ms. Khushboo Singh is depositing a photocopy of the alleged agreement by the petitioner so that the verification of the signature of Ms. Khushboo can be done.
4. Mr. Murty, the learned counsel appearing for petitioner submits that the petitioner appeared in the court at Daltonganj in one another matter and during appearance in that matter the police came before this petitioner with regard to this matter and thereafter only the petitioner came to know about the present case. He submits that the police officers have not acted in proper way and that is why the learned court has also reprimanded the officer concerned and the order has been passed by the court in Complaint Case No.1833 of 2015 dated 21.8.2017 contained in Annexure-S/4 in the supplementary affidavit. He further submits that a detailed affidavit has been filed by this petitioner in the concerned court which is contained at page 39 of the main petition. By way of referring this he submits that how the fabricated, concocted and forged document has been disclosed in this affidavit. He further submits that the petitioner has also been accused in another two matters which were the subject matter before this Court and the said petitions were allowed by this Court and subsequently O.P.No.2 took that order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has dropped section 420 IPC allegation against the petitioner and the petitioner has been directed to
