Patna High CourtCR. MISC./16134/2016rejected

Sudhir Kumar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2016-07-01Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.16134 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -75 Year- 2016 Thana -BARBIGHA District- SEKHPURA ====================================================== Sudhir Kumar Chaudhary, Son of Om Prakash Chaudhary, resident of Village Samachak, P.S. Barbigha, District - Sheikhpura. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anish Chandra, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 01-07-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Barbigha P.S. Case No. 75/16 registered under Sections 420, 409, 34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner was In-charge Headmaster of Primary School, Barbigha and he was entrusted with Rs. 8,93,300/- for construction of school building in the year 2011. An amount of Rs. 6,69,750/- by way of advance was transferred to the account of the petitioner but the petitioner did not construct any school building. The Block Education Officer inspected the site and found that no construction work was done. It is submitted that the petitioner purchased building construction materials and put them at the place of construction but could not construct the building because Manoj Kumar Singh and Anju Devi started demanding extortion. It

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16134 of 2016 (3) dt.01-07-2016 2/2 appears that Anju Devi is the Secretary of Vidyalaya Samiti. The petitioner filed the complaint case on 05.02.2016. The petitioner had taken advance in the year 2012 itself but he has not at all constructed any building nor any material was found within the premises of the school.

Considering the fact that the petitioner misappropriated huge amount meant for construction of school building, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in Barbigha P.S. Case No. 75/16. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

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