Rajendra Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.43901 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -297 Year- 2016 Thana -UDWANTNAGAR District- BHOJPUR ====================================================== Rajendra Prasad Singh, son of late Brahma Singh, resident of village Nima, P.S- Udwant Nagar, District- Bhojpur (Ara).

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Rai, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 04-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Udwant Nagar P.S.Case No. 297 of 2016 registered under Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had advanced paddy to the rice miller without getting the proportionate Custom Milled Rice (C.M.R.) in return.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during enquiry, it has come that the amount of C.M.R., which was supplied by the miller, was deposited by the petitioner, who is the Chairman of the local PACS, to the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'). It is submitted that the petitioner had not committed any wrong, as whatever C.M.R. the miller had returned, was given to the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43901 of 2016 (2) dt.04-10-2016 2/3 Corporation. It is further submitted that the mill owners have neither been noticed or show cause asked and thus, the petitioner has been only singled out for such treatment, as has also been opined by the Investigating Officer. Learned counsel further submits that the receipt of the paddy and C.M.R. also bears the signature in the concerned register.

Learned A.P.P. submits that as per the stand of the petitioner, 3348 quintals of paddy was procured and supplied to the miller, but only 749.06 quintals of C.M.R. was returned to the PACS, which was deposited in the Corporation Godown and further that the miller was supposed to give bank guarantee/bank draft proportionate to the procured paddy, but no document was made available. Thus, it is submitted that the petitioner had the responsibility for procuring the bank guarantee/bank draft proportionate to the paddy, which was given to the miller, but the same was not done. He submits that this clearly shows the fault or connivance on the part of the petitioner, leading to heavy loss of public money.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43901 of 2016 (2) dt.04-10-2016 3/3 However, in the event the petitioner surrenders before the court below within one month from today, and seeks regular bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by the present order.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Sujit/- U