Lalita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10330 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2020 Thana- NAURANGIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Lalita Devi, W/o Ramchandra Sahni, Resident of Village Madanpur (Mukhiya Tola), P.S. Naurangiya, District West Champaran. 2.

Sanjay Kumar, S/o Pathloo Yadav, Resident of Village Madanpur (Mukhiya Tola), P.S. Naurangiya, District West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. CBI through its Director/Regional Office, Patna (Bihar). ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners :

Mr. Suresh Prasad Sharma For the State :

Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha For the CBI :

Mr. Bipin Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 18-01-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties through virtual court proceedings.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in Naurangiay P.S. Case No.14 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR has been lodged on the basis of written report of Block Development Officer, Bagaha-2 in which it has been alleged that financial irregularities are committed by these petitioners under the scheme of Chief Minister Gramin Peyjal Nischay Yojana and Chief Minister Gramin Gali-Nali Pitching Yojana. Petitioners are Ward Member and Ward Secretary of Ward No.13 of Belahwa Madanpur Panchayat and despite receiving fund from Belahwa Madanpur Panchayat, both the petitioners did not complete the aforesaid work within time.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10330 of 2021(4) dt.18-01-2022 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. Most of the work have been completed by the petitioners but some work has not been completed till date. It is further submitted that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail application. Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the CBI opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submitted that the petitioners have defalcated the government money and there is material against the petitioners in the case diary.

Having considered the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected. However, petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioners on the same day without being prejudiced from the order of this Court.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J.) Sanjay/- U T