Order On Board

01/05/2024

1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.12/2024, registered at Police Station–Birra, District – Janjgir- Champa, for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections

420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code (In short, IPC).

2. As per the case of the prosecution, the complainant namely Nammu Lal Patel made a written complaint at Police Station- Birra, District- Janjgir- Champa and stating that the applicant, who is a Patwari, made some false entries in the revenue records and prepared forged B-1 and Khasra and converted the land of 2 acres belonging to the complainant-Nammu Lal to be 12 acres and in the name of co-accused Parmanand and the said co-accused obtained loan of Rs. 22 Lacs from HDFC Bank on the basis of the said forged documents. Accordingly, the FIR was registered against the applicant under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and submits at the time of incident, applicant was working as Patwari meanwhile, he had kept an assistant as he was not conversant with operating computer system and because of the mistake on the part of his Assistant, the wrong entries were made. The applicant had no intention to participate in crime in question but the prosecution authorities have falsely been implicated him in this crime in question. Prima facie, no any case has been made out against him and therefore he is entitle to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. The applicant has never been prosecuted or involved in any other criminal case. During the course of applicant's posting, he neither issued any Kisan Kitab nor issued any revenue record (B-1/P-II). The applicant is presently working as Patwari at Halka No. 6 Village-Karnaud, Tahsil-Bamhanidih, District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) and about the said incident, Collector (Lands Record) Janjgir has also issued show cause notice to the applicant whereas he replied and repeated his contentions as well as stating that digital signature has not been done by him. The loan amount was released to the co-accused after marking the digital signature by the present Patwari. The applicant is ready to abide by all the directions and conditions, which may be imposed by this Court while granting bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the Non-applicant would oppose the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, that the allegation levelled against the applicant is grievous in nature that the applicant in connivance with other co-accused has helped in preparation of forged B-1 and Khasra of a land belonging to the complainant and loan of Rs. 22 Lacs has been obtained by the co-accused showing the land of complainant to be belonging to the co-accused Parmanand, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant.

7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant – Dayaram Sahu, filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. involved in Crime No.271/2024, registered at Police Station –Birra, District – Janjgir Champa (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, is rejected.