Dhirendra Kumar Akela v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.39370 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -111 Year- 2016 Thana -GHORASAHAN DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Dhirendra Kumar Akela son of Akshay Lal Ram, resident of village - Majirawa, PO-Majirawa, PS-Chiraia, District-East Champaran, Bihar845315. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Babu, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Sahin Begam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Ghorasahan (Lakhaura) P.S. Case No. 111 of 2016 registered for the offence(s) punishable under section(s) 409/120(b)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The case has been registered on the basis of written report of Block Education Officer, Bankatwa, East Champaran. The informant inter alia has alleged that this petitioner was Head Master of Primary School, Amwariya, Bankatwa Prakhand and an amount of Rs.6,74,350/- was sanctioned in his favour for constructing the school building in the financial year 2008-2009. This petitioner neither constructed the school building nor

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39370 of 2017 (4) dt.19-08-2017 2/2 returned the money and thereby defalcated the aforesaid amount. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the school building could not be completed as the land was not provided for the said construction. The petitioner is ready to return the aforesaid amount in installment to be fixed by the Court. The petitioner is a Head Master, having clean antecedent and so, he deserves anticipatory bail.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, opposed the submission.

On perusal of the FIR, I find that the amount of Rs.6,74,350/- was sanctioned in favour of the petitioner for constructing the school building in the financial year 2008-2009 and even after lapse of 8 years, he did not construct the building and thereby defalcated the said amount.

Considering the nature of allegation, facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly, his prayer is rejected.

(Sanjay Kumar, J) Mahesh/- U T