SAKALDEO KUMAR MANDAL @ SAKALDEO MANDAL vs The State of Bihar through Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna
- Court
- Patna High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51350 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-443 Year-2023 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui
======================================================
SAKALDEO KUMAR MANDAL @ SAKALDEO MANDAL S/o- LATE
RAMI MANDAL Village- Satganwa Ps- Jamui Dist- jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna Bihar
2. The Superintendent of Police, Jamui Bihar
3. The District Magistrate, Jamui Bihar
4. The Officer Incharge, Police Station- Jamui Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Priyanka Singh, Adv.
Mr.Umesh Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Bihari Sen, Adv.
Mr.Harsh Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajit Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 15-05-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks quashing of the F.I.R. in connection
with Jamui P.S. Case No. 443 of 2023, by which the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Jamui has taken cognizance of the offences
under Sections 419, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) and 353 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case in brief is this. A person named
Amod Shah @ Suman Kumar was apprehended. Upon inquiry, it
transpired that he had appeared in court in place of a wanted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51350 of 2023 dt.15-05-2026
2/5
accused, namely Pappu Mandal @ Suresh Mandal. The CCTV
footage of the court premises was perused. It disclosed that on
11.07.2023 at around 14:21 hours, a person entered the area
reserved for the accused inside the courtroom. The photograph of
Suman Kumar @ Amod Shah was shown to the District
Prosecution Officer, who confirmed that this person had appeared
in court in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 81 of 2020 in
place of the accused Pappu Mandal @ Suresh Mandal. Upon
further questioning, Suman Kumar @ Amod Shah stated that in
some old case, the details of which he could not disclose, the
petitioner Sakaldeo Kumar Mandal had asked him to appear before
the court, and that he had accordingly gone to the courtroom. The
District Prosecution Officer and the Assistant District Prosecution
Officer separately confirmed that no bail application had been filed
on behalf of Suman Kumar @ Amod Shah in the matter. Upon the
basis of the foregoing, the police suspected that a forgery had been
committed, and registered the present case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there
is no direct or independent material against the petitioner except
the alleged statement of the co-accused, which itself does not
disclose any specific case details or overt act attributed to the
petitioner. Admittedly, no bail application was filed by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51350 of 2023 dt.15-05-2026
3/5
petitioner on behalf of the alleged impersonator. The prosecution
case is therefore based on nothing more than suspicion and
conjecture, without any legally admissible evidence connecting the
petitioner to the alleged occurrence. Continuation of the criminal
proceeding against the petitioner, it is submitted, would amount to
an abuse of the process of the Court.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. in
connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 443 of 2023.
6. The records of this case have been carefully perused.
The prosecution case against the petitioner rests entirely and
exclusively upon the statement made by the co-accused Suman
Kumar @ Amod Shah during police inquiry. That statement, made
to a police officer, is inadmissible in evidence under the law. It
cannot constitute substantive evidence against the petitioner.
Beyond this statement, the records would show that there is not a
shred of independent material connecting the petitioner to the
offences alleged. No forged document bears his hand. No CCTV
footage places him at the scene. No financial transaction, no call
record, no corroborating circumstance of any kind is cited in the
FIR against him. The FIR itself records that no bail application
was filed by the petitioner on behalf of Suman Kumar @ Amod
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51350 of 2023 dt.15-05-2026
4/5
Shah. This admitted fact directly contradicts the very basis on
which the petitioner has been implicated.
7. The offences charged include Sections 467 and 468
of the Indian Penal Code, which are serious charges going to the
integrity of court proceedings. This Court is alive to that gravity. It
is precisely because these are serious charges that the absence of
any admissible, independent material against the petitioner
becomes all the more significant. It must be recorded, and
recorded clearly, that even if the entirety of the prosecution case is
accepted at face value, as this Court is required to do in the
exercise of its quashing jurisdiction, there is no legally cognizable
material before the Court that would connect the petitioner to these
offences. The prosecution case against the petitioner is built
wholly upon an inadmissible statement. That is not a foundation; it
is conjecture. Proceeding on conjecture alone, in a case where the
petitioner is a member of the legal profession, would render the
process of this Court itself an instrument of oppression.
8. In such view of the matter, this Court, in exercise of
its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita (erstwhile Section 482 CrPC), to do complete
justice, finds that the continuation of the criminal proceeding
arising out of Jamui P.S. Case No. 443 of 2023 against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51350 of 2023 dt.15-05-2026
5/5
petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of the Court.
Accordingly, the F.I.R. arising therefrom and the proceedings
pending before the concerned Court, Jamui are hereby quashed so
far as the petitioner is concerned.
9. The present petition stands allowed.
(Ansul, J)
abhishekkr/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 05.06.2026
Transmission Date