Patna High CourtCR. REV./1076/2018dismissed

Anil Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS.

2022-08-26Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL REVISION No.1076 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-643 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== Anil Kumar Singh, S/o Late Tejnarayan Singh, Resident of "Anamika Kunj", Road No.7 North Patel Nagar, Indrapuri, Near-Baba Chowk, Post-Keshari Nagar, Police Station-Patliputra, District-Patna. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Krishna Murari, Superintending Engineer, Central Circle, Road Construction Department, Post-G.P.O., P.S.-Gandhi Maidan, District-Patna-800001 3.

Bhawani Nandan the then Chief Engineer, South Bihar (Traffic) Sub Wing, Road Construction Department, Vishweshraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Post and P.S.-Sachivalya, District-Patna-800015. At Presently posted as Chief Engineer, Urban Development and Housing Department, Govt. of Bihar, Vikash Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna-800001.

... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate.

For the State :

Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 26-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner in the present case is aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order dated 07.06.2018 passed in complaint case no. 643C/2018 under Section 203 Cr.P.C.

This petitioner is said to be a Junior Engineer in the office of Central Circle, Road Construction Department, Patna01. He alleges that for carrying out the repairing work of HilsaNoorsarai road, he had prepared a draft of work allotment on 19.11.2016 and the same was recommended by the Estimate

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1076 of 2018(5) dt.26-08-2022 2/2 Officer/ Technical Advisor of the Superintending Engineer. Later on, it was found that the accused nos. 1 & 2 acted in collusion with each other and they did several cuttings and manipulations in the said draft. In this respect, they were unable to give any satisfactory reply to the complainant- petitioner. This Court finds on perusal of the impugned order that the main grievance of the petitioner was against the punishment of sensor awarded to him and his transfer. He has contested his transfer unsuccessfully in the High Court. The learned A.C.J.M. - 12th Court, Patna did not find any prima-facie material to take cognizance of the offences alleged, hence, dismissed the complaint petition. This Court agrees with the view taken by the learned court below.

This application has no merit. It is, thus, dismissed accordingly.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.