Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9212/2018rejected

Sujeet Kumar @ Bobby v. The State Of Bihar

2018-04-18Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9212 of 2018 (2) dt.18-04-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9212 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -16 Year- 2016 Thana -AKBARPUR District- NAWADA ======================================================

1. Sujeet Kumar @ Bobby S/o Ram Naresh Singh, R/o Village- Dudhaily, P.S.- Akbarpur, District- Nawada, presently posted as Incharge Headmaster Nav Srijit Primary School, Azad Nagar, P.S.- Akbarpur, District- Nawada. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dharmendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dashrath Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 18-04-2018 Heard Mr. Bakshi S.R.P. Sinha appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Akbarpur P.S. Case No.16 of 2016 registered under Section 420 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to deposit the entire amount said to have been defalcated by the petitioner with interest. The District Programme Officer also directed the Block Education Officer, Akbarpur to institute a case for defalcation of the amount besides lodging a proceeding under P.D.R. Act for realization of the defalcation amount from the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner may be

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9212 of 2018 (2) dt.18-04-2018 granted anticipatory bail.

The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order dated 26.07.2016 after considering all the facts that it was the petitioner who being the Headmaster withdrew Rs.4,90,000/- for construction of school building in the financial year 2007-08 but the petitioner did not construct any part of the building and he utilized the government money for more than ten years. The petitioner is ready to deposit the money only after institution of F.I.R. It is a case of defalcation and a Headmaster instead of getting the school building constructed defalcated entire amount. Therefore, I do not find any new ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner is once again rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T