Kamta Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34550 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2026 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN DistrictGopalganj ====================================================== Kamta Singh S/o Late Bishwanath Singh Resident of Village and P.S. - Bishambharpur, Dist. - Gopalganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 27-07-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Gopalganj P.S. Case No. 165 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 316(2), 316(5) and 61(2) of the B.N.S., lodged on 17.02.2026 by the informant Dharmendra Kumar.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the petitioner in collusion with the then Block Pramukh, Contractor and the Block Development Officer siphoned off Rs.19,81,352/- under the 15th Finance Commission for the Financial Year 2021-22 which was sanctioned for the Chhath Ghats. This withdrawal was made without performing any actual work. Accordingly, the F.I.R. was lodged by the District

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34550 of 2026(3) dt.27-07-2026 2/2 Panchayati Raj Officer, Gopalganj.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he now stands retired and Rs.16,62,378/- has been cleared by the Block Pramukh.

5. Learned State counsel on the other hand submits that the fact that Rs.16,62,378/- has been deposited clearly show that the petitioner alongwith others siphoned off the money and as such, only because he has retired, no relief can be granted.

6. Taking into account the submissions of the parties as also the fact that a work was executed on paper and the petitioner among others siphoned off the money, in that background, no relief can be extended to him.

7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T