Dilip Rangari v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 544 of 2015 Dilip Rangari S/o Amrit Lal Rangari Aged About 43 years R/o Station Para Ward No. 9, Rajnandgaon, P.S. & Post Rajnandgaon, Civil & Revenue District Rajnandgaon ( Chhattisgarh) ----Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Trough P.S. Rajnandgaon, Civil & Revenue District Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate Order On Board 27/07/2015 Heard.

This application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 86/2015, registered in Police Station- Rajnandgaon, for alleged commission of offence under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 of the IPC.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that during the period applicant was posted as Block Resource Coordinator in Rajiv Gandhi Siksha Mission, huge public fund has been misappropriated and diverted by forging records. Learned counsel for the applicant submits the nature and magnitude of accusation renders it wholly improbable that the applicant would have done it .He submits that the applicant is neither the Drawing and Disbursing Authority nor having competence to order purchase of material. He further submits that accounts were being maintained by the Accountant, therefore, the involvement of the applicant is merely an attempt of shielding real culprits and making the applicant a scapegoat.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that an inquiry committee, comprised of Senior Officials and Accountant, after meticulous examination of records, has found that serious financial irregularities have been committed in the matter of purchase and payments and the total loss caused to the public exchequer is more than Rs.15 lakhs.

would be taken.

Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, looking to the nature and gravity of allegation, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

The application is accordingly rejected.

In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the State, as above, a copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent of Police, Rajnandgaon. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen