Gauri Shankar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar Through The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.628 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- BANKA =========================================================== Gauri Shankar Prasad (J.E. Barahat Block) son of Ram Nath Prasad, resident of village- Mahuaria, P.S. - Shivhar, District - Shivhar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Banka.

4. The Officer Incharge Banka (Barahat) Police Station, District- Banka.

5. Vijay Kumar Sinha (Informant), the then Programme Officer, Barahat, P.S.- Barahat, District Banka son of Late Surendra Mohan Prasad, resident of villageUsti, P.S.- Baniyapur, District - Chapra, State of Bihar.

6. The District Transport Officer, Banka being member of an Enquiry Team of the alleged occurence.

7. The Executive Engineer (Manrega) D.R.D.A. Banka being member of an enquiry team of the alleged occurrence.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shambhu Sharan Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anshuman, G.P.-24 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 03-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

By way of the present application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India , the petitioner seeks quashing of the first information report of Banka (Barahat) P.S.Case No.126 of 2014 registered under Sections 406, 409 and 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner being a Junior Engineer was not involved in any manner

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.628 of 2015 dt.03-02-2016 2/2 with the execution of the schemes, in question, under which it has been alleged that defalcation has taken place. It has been further contended that in one another case instituted against the petitioner in which on completion of investigation the police have submitted final report on completion of investigation.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has contended that the informant Vijay Kumar Sinha, a Programme Officer, Banka, has alleged that the petitioner in conspiracy with other officials defalcated public money by withdrawing the same without executing several schemes of the Government.

4. I have heard respective counsel for the parties and perused the allegations made in the FIR as contained in annexure 2 to the present application. The allegations do attract ingredients of a cognizable offence.

5. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the present application. Accordingly, it is dismissed. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md.S./- U T