Sanjay Jha v. State of Chhattisgarh
(2014) 3 SCC 202
In the Supreme Court of India
SLP (Crl.) 4161/2013
Before Justice A.K. Patnaik and Justice F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla
Decided on January 31, 2014

Relevancy of the case: Bail application for creating fake documents using the internet

Statutes & Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 66C)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 420, 467, 468, 466, 471, 484, 34)
• The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 439)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The petitioner was alleged to be involved in creating fake documents from the internet. He was also accompanied by a co-accused who was a first-year law student and a twenty-one-year-old girl.
• The petitioner and the girl had generated certain fake documents from the internet, arranged for a mock medical examination, forged the signature of Railway Minister using his fake letterhead, and prepared a forged medical report. The accused even took 20 lakhs from the complainant for doing the same.
• The accused were held liable under Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 420, 467, 468, 466, 471, 484 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
• The co-accused was already released on bail. The petitioner was denied bail by the High Court due to lack of merit in the case. The petitioner has been in custody from 20-03-2012.
• The petitioner approached the Supreme Court to pray for the grant of bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

The petitioner’s counsel:

• The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was refused regular bail by the High Court for the offences under Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 420, 467, 468, 466, 471, 484 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in connection with FIR 86/2012. It was argued that the co-accused has already been granted bail and the trial will take more time

The respondent’s counsel:

• The counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner’s first bail was rejected on the grounds of not having any merits. The bail application was admitted since the co-accused has been granted regular bail by the Supreme Court. On perusal of the order passed by the Supreme Court, the co-accused was granted bail due to the reason that she was a young 21-year-old girl who was in the first year of law school.

Opinion of the Bench

• The petitioner is alleged of committing the offence of creating fake documents, making arrangements for a mock medical examination, using fake letterhead of the Railway Minister, forging his signatures, making a false medical report and receiving payment from the complainant of Rs. 20 lakhs.

Final Decision

• The court denied granting bail to the petitioner and the bail application is dismissed.

This case summary has been prepared by Afsana Khan, an undergraduate student at Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad, during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in June/July 2020.