Md. Zahoorul Haque@Md. Jahrul Haq v. The State Of Bihar Through Vigilance Department
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7254 of 2015 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2013 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Patna ====================================================== Md. Zahoorul Haque@Md. Jahrul Haq S/o Late Md. Abbas Ali Resident of Mohalla- Buddhu Chak, New Officer Colony, P.S. Korha, District Katihar. ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Bihar through Vigilance Department ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sumeet Kumar Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ramakant Sharma/OI.C.Vig.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 25-06-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioner is an accused in connection with Vigilance P.S.Case No.60 of 2013 registered under Sections 409,420,467,468,471,477A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that while he was posted as Executive Engineer, (NREP) Local Area Engineering Organization Work Division, Bhagalpur he passed measurement report in respect of eight Government schemes acknowledging the fact that work has been completed whereas work was not completed. The aforesaid report was submitted in collusion with Assistant Engineer- Dhrub Prasad Munshi who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7254 of 2015 dt.25-06-2019 2/3 was contractor of the Govt. schemes. The FIR was lodged after preliminary enquiry by the vigilance. The petitioner has challenged the order of cognizance dated 26.11.2014 passed in the aforesaid case corresponding to Special Case No.20 of 2013 pending before the court of learned Special Judge, Vigilance-II, Patna.
4. After hearing the parties, I do not find any merit in the ground that the allegation made in the FIR on their face value does not disclose a cognizable offence made out against the petitioner and even if any non-cognizable offence is made out, investigation of the same is not permissible, except under order of the learned Magistrate.
5. After hearing the parties and after going through the record, I do not find that cognizable offence is not disclosed in the FIR against the petitioner. Apparent allegation of embezzlement of public money is there. Petitioner is a Govt. servant having specific allegation of submission of measurement report showing completion of the work whereas the work was not completed at all in respect of eight referred Govt. schemes. Hence, prima facie material is there against the petitioner for proceeding with the trial.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7254 of 2015 dt.25-06-2019 3/3
6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed as devoid of any merit.
(Birendra Kumar, J) Nitesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 26.06.2019 Transmission Date 26.06.2019