Babloo Prasad v. The State Of Bihar Through The Vigilance

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.56921 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2017 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Babloo Prasad, Son of Khoob Lal Prasad, Resident of Mohalla- Patwa Toli, P.O. Siwan, P.S. Siwan, District- Siwan, the then Chairman of Siwan, Nagar Praishad, District- Siwan.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar through the Vigilance.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravi Bhushan Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramakant Sharma, (L.O.,Inc.,Vigilance) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 28-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 22.09.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 35388 of 2017 as not pressed.

It is alleged in the written report that on the recommendation of this petitioner, who was the Chairman of Nagar Parishad, Siwan, payment has been made towards purchase and maintenance of solar light, Led street light, high mask light, garbage dustbin etc. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Vigilance Investigation Bureau, filed complaint report to S.H.O., Patna Vigilance Police Station, on the basis of enquiry report of vigilance team which is part of the FIR. It has been mention in the report in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.56921 of 2017(3) dt.28-03-2018 2/2 detail about the irregularities and illegal payment having been made on the recommendation of this petitioner in collusion with other accused to different firms for purchase and maintenance of Solar Light, High Mask Light, LED Street Light, Dustbin and purchase of LED Screen Display.

There is specific allegation against the petitioner in the written report. The prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner was earlier rejected as not pressed.

Therefore, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the court below within six weeks from the date of receipt of the order and seek regular bail which will be considered by the court below in accordance with law and disposed off without being prejudiced by this order.

(Sanjay Priya, J) khushbu/- U T