IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.49680 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -6 Year- 2014 Thana -C.B.I CASE District- PATNA
1. Ajay Kumar son of Late Ram Jatan Paswan resident of Kaushal Nagar,
House No: 172, Polo Road, P.S Hawaiadda, Town + District-Patna
…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus
1. Central Bureau of Investigation, S C B, Patna
…. …. Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P.N. Shahi,
Mr. Patanjali Rishi
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, S.C. CBI.
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
9 02-03-2017 The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection
with CBI/SCB/Patna R..C. 0922014S0006/14, registered for
offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468 and 471
of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegation against the petitioner is that he and other two
accused persons, secured appointment in income tax department,
by producing forged castes certificates of schedule castes and
scheduled tribes, thereafter the matter was enquired and initially
charge-sheet was submitted only against other two accused
persons in the year 2015 but later on charge-sheet under Section
420 against this petitioner was also submitted in the year 2016.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the
petitioner was provided employment only after necessary
verification of his castes certificate, as he never concealed the fact
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49680 of 2016 (9) dt.02-03-2017
2/4
that the petitioner was originally not of scheduled caste but later
on by virtue of adoption became a scheduled caste and the factum
of adoption of the petitioner including the registered deed of
adoption executed by his adoptive father was very much in the
knowledge of the appointing authority. It has also been submitted
that Section 12 of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 is
very clear that the caste of the adopted child will be governed by
the adoptive father only. It has also been submitted that uptil now,
no proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner and he is
still in service though against other two accused persons, same
was initiated and after enquiry, they had been dismissed from
service.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Central Bureau
of Investigation opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the
petitioner including other two persons secured the appointment in
income tax department by producing forged castes certificates, for
which charge-sheet has been filed against all the three accused
persons under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and the bail
application of other two accused persons have already been
dismissed by this Court vide order dated 03.08.2016 passed in
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 19362 of 2016 and 21467 of 2016
respectively, which has been affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court
as well. As regards the adoption certificate, the same cannot be
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49680 of 2016 (9) dt.02-03-2017
3/4
relied upon as the deed of adoption was executed after the age of
fifteen years, which is not permissible in the eye of law. It has
further been submitted that materials collected during
investigation shows that the petitioner all along has been living
with his biological parents and only to get the job, he has produced
the forged caste certificate of Scheduled Caste community and he
has also not married in scheduled caste.
Having heard both sides, considering the fact that the
petitioner was appointed in the Income Tax Department in the
year 1989 and at the time of appointment, all the verifications
including the caste of the petitioner was made and the department
was fully aware of the fact that though the petitioner originally
belonged to OBC category but by virtue of adoption, he was
appointed in the category of Scheduled Castes, therefore, it is not
so that the petitioner concealed or suppressed any material fact
with regard to his caste and he was appointed after due enquiry.
The petitioner is still in service and no departmental proceeding
has been initiated against him. So far the cases of other two
accused persons are concerned, their cases are different from the
petitioner as after enquiry and proceeding, they have been
dismissed from service.
In view of the above, petitioner, above named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49680 of 2016 (9) dt.02-03-2017
4/4
period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy
of this order, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000
(Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judicial Magistrate,
C.B.I.-I, Patna in connection with CBI/SCB/Patna R..C.
0922014S0006/14, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
This is further subject to the condition that:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a
local person having sufficient immovable
property within the jurisdiction of the
concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and
make himself available as and when required
by the court and on the event of failure on
his part two appear before the court on two
consecutive dates without showing any
genuine reasons, the prosecution will be free
to move for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J)
sunil/-
U T