Hasina Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27551 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-442 Year-2022 Thana- AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Hasina Khatoon W/o Abrar Ahmad Resident of Village- Amjharsharif, P.S.- Haspura, Dist.- Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Sahina Khatoon Wife of Nijamuddin Ansari Resident of VillageAmjharsharif, P.O. and P.S.- Haspura, Dist.- Aurangabad ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ashok Kumar No.6 For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs.Rita Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a complaint case punishable for offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, this petitioner alongwith others misappropriated huge government money to the tune of Rs. 18 lacs approximately, which was allotted under 'Nal Jal Yojana' to the concerned Gram Panchayat. At the relevant time, petitioner was Mukhiya of the Gram Panchayat.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27551 of 2024(4) dt.23-07-2024 2/2 case merely because he happens to be Mukhiya of the concerned panchayat. He further submits that petitioner has no role to play in the construction work. As a matter of fact, the cheques in question were issued in favour of work agency Shree Hit Infra Solution Pvt. Ltd. Co., who had been entrusted with the said work under the Nal Jal Yojana.
5. However, learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and at the relevant time, he was Mukhiya of the panchayat and there is specific allegation in the complaint that this petitioner in collusion with other co-accused misappropriated government fund.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T