Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2795/2024rejected

Sunil Kumar Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

2024-04-16Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2795 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-93 Year-2023 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria ====================================================== Sunil Kumar Gupta S/O Vidyanand Prasad Gupta R/O Village - Mirdaul, P.S.- Narpatganj, District-Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gopal Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-04-2024 Heard Mr. Gopal Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 93 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 05.04.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution story in short, according to the informant Block Development Officer Mamta Kumari is that on the ground inspection it was found that under the Scheme of Pradhanmantri Awas Yojna Rs. 26,60,000/- has been embezzled by Md. Abul Kalam and Sunil Kumar Gupta.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2795 of 2024(4) dt.16-04-2024 2/2 allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, on the basis of material available on record and the case diary, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that due to inaction of the petitioner the Government money Rs. 26,60,000/- has been distributed among the persons who are not eligible for the money in question for the purpose of Pradhanmantri Awas Yojna. Further submits on the basis of report as submitted by the petitioner the amount in question has been distributed among the beneficiaries and it has been found during investigation that the petitioner has furnished the wrong details of the beneficiaries.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 93 of 2023 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Araria.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T