Rakesh Kumar Ghalaut v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.79263 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-342 Year-2018 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Rakesh Kumar Ghalaut Son of Late Jagdish Prasad Singh, Resident of Village - Dharam Pipra, P.S.- Jagdishpur, District - Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sri Ajay Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 28-01-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Jagdishpur P.S. Case No.342 of 2018 registered under Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Block Education Officer of Jagdishpur alleged that the Headmasters of five schools withdrew huge amount from the account for construction of school building in the financial year 2009-2010 and onwards but they did not construct any building and misappropriated the entire amount. The petitioner was the Headmaster of Primary School, Mahatati and withdrew Rs.6 lacs in the year 2009-2010 for construction of three additional class room but the petitioner did not either construct the building or deposit the amount in the head of the school. When the matter was reviewed in the year 2018, the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.79263 of 2018(2) dt.28-01-2019 2/2 petitioner was asked to deposit the amount but when the petitioner failed to deposit the amount, the F.I.R. was lodged. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner after withdrawing the amount for construction of additional class room gave money to brick kiln supplier, stone supplier and cement supplier but on account of hindrance put by the villagers, the petitioner could not construct the building but I find that it is a lame excuse on the part of the petitioner who withdrew the money in the financial year 2009-2010 for construction of additional class room and the petitioner misappropriated the entire amount and did not construct any additional class room for more than eight years. It is a glaring example of gross misappropriation.

Having considered the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Harish/- U