Dismissed

Santosh Kumar Mishra v. Central Bureau of Investigation.

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2023BAIL/3341/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal bail application, the Allahabad High Court rejected the plea of Santosh Kumar Mishra for bail in a case involving misappropriation of MGNREGA funds. The Court held that the nature of conspiracy charges made him ineligible for bail at the current stage, ordering trial proceedings to expedite.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial to proceed expeditiously with examination of two witnesses within four months.

Santosh Kumar Mishra Vs Central Bureau of Investigation. — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3341 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Mishra Opposite Party :- Central Bureau Of Investigation. Counsel for Applicant :- Shivendra Kumar Singh,Sanjai Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sanjai Kumar Pandey as well as Sri Shivendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as Sri Gyan Prakash Srivastava, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for CBI, and gone through the entire record.

¶6

By means of this application under Section 439 CrPC, the accused-applicant seeks bail in RC No. 1202015A0008, under Sections 120B, 420, 409 and 201 I.P.C., P.S. CBI/ACB Ghaziabad, District Ghaziabad.

¶7

The accused-applicant was posted in District Mathura as Project Officer of Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Construction & Development Ltd. (UPCCDL). Having its Head Office at Lucknow.

¶8

In compliance of the order dated 31.1.2014 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.12802 (M.B.) of 2011 and another connected Writ Petition, the C.B.I. was directed to investigate the abuse of misappropriation of funds of MGNREGA scheme with regard to seven districts of State of Uttar Pradesh, namely, Balrampur, Gonda, Mahoba, Sonbhadra, Sant Kabir Nagar, Mirzapur and Kushinagar in the years 2007 to 2010 in accordance with law.

¶9

This Court vide order dated 12.11.2014 had permitted the C.B.I. to conclude the enquiry in two phases in which the first phase the amount involved more than Rs.40 lacs and in second phase the amount was less than Rs.40 lacs. The preliminary enquiry No.1202014A007 was registered in C.B.I., A.C.B., Ghaziabad in respect of misappropriation of funds MGNREGA Scheme for District Mathura. The present accused-applicant was posted as Project Manager of M/s. Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Construction and Development Ltd. Mathura. The allegation during the period 2007-08, 2009-10, the accused persons including the present accused conspired with each other and in

¶10

furtherance of conspiracy for payment of Rs.55.30 lacs was made dishonestly and fraudulently in violation of prescribed norms and thereby huge pecuniary loss to the tune of Rs. 55.30 lacs was caused to the Government in the execution of interlocking work by M/s. UPCCDL in seven villages of district Mathura. It is alleged that the accused-applicant and other public servant in violation of stipulated norms, wrongly entrusted the execution of interlocking works in the seven villages under MGNREGA scheme to M/s UPCCDL.

¶11

During the course of investigation the role of accused-applicant had come to the light regarding his involvement and criminal conspiracy with other co-accused in misappropriation of public funds under the MGNREGA scheme. It is revealed during investigation that Sri Bhikhari Singh and Vinod Singh and present accused-applicant entered into conspiracy with each other. It is alleged that in furtherance of criminal conspiracy the accused-applicant had committed an offence of criminal breach of trust and was involved in disappearance of evidence of funds thereby caused wrongful loss to the Government exchequer to the tune of Rs.7.50 lacs for non-execution of work in village Badangarh, Block Nandgaon, District Mathura and corresponding given to himself. Learned counsel for accusedapplicant submits that one of the co-accused who was said to be involved in criminal conspiracy with co-accused has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 6.7.2022 who was posted as Project Manager in District Mathura of UPCCDL. It is further submits that considering the role of accused-applicant with the co-accused Chandra Shekhar Gupta who has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 6.7.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 53521 of 2021 and also the fact that the accused-applicant is in jail since 15.12.2021, it is therefore, prayed that the accused-applicant may also be admitted on bail on the ground of parity.

¶12

On the other hand Gyan Prakash Srivastava, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for CBI has submitted that this Court has rejected the bail application of Bhikhari Singh and Vinod Singh vide detailed order dated 18.8.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application Nos. 16787 of 2022 and 15136 of 2022, the role of the present accused-applicant is similar to the two co-accused.

¶13

Considering the nature of allegations that the accused-applicant in criminal conspiracy with other co-accused misappropriated Government fund which was meant for development of rural areas of district Mathura, this Court does not find to be a fit a case to enlarge the present accused-applicant on bail at this stage, therefore, the present bail application is hereby rejected.

¶14

The accused-applicant may revive the bail plea after the two witnesses of fact get examined before the learned trial court.

¶15

Learned trial court is directed to proceed with the trial expeditiously and record the evidence of two witnesses of fact preferably within a period of four months from today.

¶16

Let this order passed today be transmitted to the learned trial court forthwith for necessary compliance.

¶17

Order Date :- 12.1.2023 Md Faisal

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MOHD FAISAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Santosh Kumar Mishra v. Central Bureau of Investigation.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar Mishra v. Central Bureau of Investigation.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radhey Shyam Rastogi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satish Chand Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aman Khan and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Pal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hiresh Saram Saxena Vs State of U.P. and Another