Allowed

Sanjeet Kumar Sharma v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Aug 2024CR. MISC./43611/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner, a Ward Secretary charged with misappropriation under Sections 409 and 420 IPC, upon furnishing a bond with two sureties, noting his custody since March 2024 and lack of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail on furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the S.D.J.M. Rosera, Dist. Samastipur.

Sanjeet Kumar Sharma Vs The State of Bihar — Corruption | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43611 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-393 Year-2022 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Sanjeet Kumar Sharma Son Of Bijli Sharma Village- Shahpur, Panchayat - Bhuswar Ward -13, P.S.- Bibhutipur, Distt.- Samastipur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 23-08-2024

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶12

A.P.P. for the State.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 393 of 2022 dated 12-10-2022, instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

The prosecution case, in short, is that the then Ward Member, namely, Laxmi Ram and Ward Secretary, namely Lalit Kumar Sharma of Ward No. 11 and the then Ward Member, namely, Gayatri Devi and Ward Secretary, namely Sanjit Kumar Sharma (petitioner) of Ward No. 13, under Panchayat Bhushwar have made allegation against the then Mukhiya, namely, Manoj Kumar of receiving an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Two Lacs) for ward No. 11 and Rs. 4,00,000/- (Four Lacs) for Ward No. 13

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43611 of 2024(3) dt.23-08-2024 2/3

¶16

through cheque for constructing the road in the concerned Ward under C.M. Village Gali Nali Pakikaran Yojana (for short ‘the Yojana’), but the said work has not been completed and local technical Assistant Bibhutipur, also submitted inquiry report dated 07-04-2022 stating that said work has not been completed which goes to show that the accused persons misappropriated the alleged amount.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that petitioner is the Secretary of the said Panchayat, wherein, an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Four Lacs) is said to have been misappropriated in the name of Yojana. The Secretary and Ward member of Ward No. 13 themselves made a complaint against Mukhiya of the Gram Panchayat , who received an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Four Lacs) through cheque to complete the work on 25-01-2021 (Annexure-2), but he has not completed the work. It is also submitted that from bare perusal of the FIR, it is evident that the local Technical Assistant Bibhutipur, inquired the matter and submitted its report dated 07-04-2022, which is part of the FIR, which reveals that Mukhiya of concerned Gram Panchayat received Rs. 4,00,000/- (Four Lacs) for completing the work for Ward No.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43611 of 2024(3) dt.23-08-2024 3/3

¶19

13, but the work has not been completed, and as such, there is no fault on the part of the petitioner. The petitioner has no role in utilizing the said amount which was handed over to the said Mukhiya . It is further submits that co-accused Ward Member, namely, Gayatri Devi has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 45641 of 2024. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 14.03.2024, having no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

¶20

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶21

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M. Rosera, Dist. Samastipur, in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 393 of 2022, corresponding to G.R. No. 1172 of 2022.

¶22

prabhat/-

¶23

U T

¶24

(Khatim Reza, J)

Sanjeet Kumar Sharma v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeet Kumar Sharma v. The State of Bihar

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

Dablu Goswami Vs The State of Bihar

Nitesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shyam Sundar Pandit Vs The State of Bihar

Umesh @ Umesh kumar Yadav @ Umesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Prani Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Lal Babu Patel Vs The State of Bihar