Kanchan Devi @ Smt Kanchan Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11670 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-341 Year-2021 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== KANCHAN DEVI @ SMT KANCHAN DEVI W/o Sanjeet Kumar Resident of Village- Mohanpur, Ward No.6, Ward Member, Resident of VillageKharba, P.S.- Goradih, District- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-09-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Jagdishpur (Goradih) P.S. Case No. 341of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner is ex officio member of the Ward Implementation and Management Committee as she is a ward member. The FIR shows that Rs. 19,00,000/- have been refunded in her account for works of Seven Nishchay Nal Jal Yojna but the works only upto Rs. 8,18,643/- was found to be completed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11670 of 2022(2) dt.17-09-2022 2/2 per Annexure-2 that entire work was assigned to RB enterprises and the RB enterprises has not completed the work. Learned Addl.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail. The petitioner being the member of Ward Implementation and Management Committee was duty bound to get the work satisfactorily be done. If the work is not completed by RB enterprises why the case has not been lodged by the petitioner against RB enterprises that has not been explained. As such, I do not think it to be a fit case for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected. Petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below and make a prayer for regular bail.

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) kundan/-sonali U T