Ram Ayodhya Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24506 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2016 Thana- MADHUBANI TOWN DistrictMadhubani ====================================================== RAM AYODHYA THAKUR Son of Sri Narayan Thakur Resident of VillageKanana, P.S.- Raxaul, District- East Champaran. The then Executive Engineer Cum Member Secretary Jila Jal Swakshta Samiti, Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs.Nivedita Nirvikar, Adv.

For the State :

Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Sections 406, 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120(B)//34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rerjected vide Cr. Misc. Nos. 42314 of 2016 and 26944 of 2018 by orders dated 11-01-2017 & 28-11-2018. This is the third attempt of the petitioner for grant of bail.

The consideration in the rejection was that the petitioner happened to be the Executive Engineer-cum-Member Secretary in the District Water and Sanitation Committee. Under the scheme of Swachhata Aviyan, toilets were to be constructed in the rural areas and an amount of Rs. 46 lakhs and 42 lakhs were

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24506 of 2019(5) dt.08-01-2020 2/2 withdrawn for the said scheme for construction of 460 & odd toilets and 423 toilets under the rural scheme. A huge misappropriation of public money was made by the accused persons including the petitioner.

A report was called for from the trial court regarding the stage of the case. It has been reported that the prosecution evidence has been closed and the case is pending for the defence witnesses. It has further been indicated that the defence is not cooperating with the trial. It is further indicated in the report that the trial may be concluded within a period of four months. Considering the nature of accusation and the stage of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Madhubani Town P.S. Case No. 152 of 2016 is rejected. The court below is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. (Sudhir Singh, J) A.K.V.//- U T