Dismissed

Jitender Dutt v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC30 Jan 2013CRM-M/3169/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding alleged misappropriation of old age pension funds, the High Court held that discredit of government employees does not necessarily falsify the case. Allegations of false records motivated by self-preservation justified further investigation, leading to the dismissal of the pre-arrest bail plea.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail application dismissed; petitioners not entitled to bail.

Jitender Dutt Vs State of Haryana — Corruption | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No. M- 3169 of 2013

¶2

----1--

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-3169 of 2013(O&M) Date of decision. 30.01.2013

Jitender Dutt

....... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Haryana

........ Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK

¶11

Present:Mr. Sanjay Majithia, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Shailender Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J.

¶13

Crl. Misc. No.6009 of 2013

¶14

Miscellaneous application is allowed as prayed for.

¶15

Crl. Misc. No.M-3169 of 2013

¶16

Jitender Dutt, the petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in a case registered by way of FIR No. 298 dated 25.12.2012 at Police Station Sadar Narwana, District Jind, for an offence punishable under sections 406, 409, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 506 read with section 34 IPC.

¶17

Crl. Misc. No. M- 3169 of 2013

¶18

----2--

¶19

It is a case of misappropriation of the amount received in the name of 'Old Age Pension'. Jitender Dutt, the petitioner is Sarpanch of village Bhana Brahmana, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind. It is the allegation in the FIR that the contract for disbursement of the pension for the months of March and April, 2011 was given to Ramesh Jangra, accused no.1 and he did not disburse the same for the said months and the amount of pension for the months of January and February, 2012 was not distributed by Jitender Dutt, accused no.2. It is claimed by Lakhi Ram, the complainant that by not distributing the old age pension to the persons entitled to the same, the accused have misappropriated lacs of rupees.

¶20

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per procedure, the cheque of the amount of old age pension comes in the name of the sarpanch of the village and he encashes the same. According to him, after disbursement of the pension, if any amount is left undisbursed, then Panchayat Secretary deposits the same with the Government. He has further submitted that Satpal is the Panchayat Secretary of the village and by way of his affidavit Annexure P-6, he has stated that the old age pension was rightly disbursed. According to him, Satpal is a government employee and there is no reason to disbelieve his statement made in the affidavit.

¶21

Crl. Misc. No. M- 3169 of 2013

¶22

----3--

¶23

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that even Lakhi Ram, the complainant has received the old age pension during the aforesaid period. According to him, Annexure P-7 is the affidavit of Sat Narayan, an elected member of the village panchayat and Annexure P-7/A is affidavit of Ram Kumar, another elected member of Gram Panchayat Bhana Brahmana, who have sworn affidavits to the effect that old age pension has been disbursed properly. According to him, the petitioner is sarpanch of the village and the FIR has been lodged on account of the previous enmity.

¶24

Lakhi Ram, the complainant, who is one of the recipients of old age pension, has claimed that old age pension for the aforesaid period has not been disbursed and lacs of rupees have been misappropriated by the petitioner and his co-accused Ramesh Jangra. The only fact that Satpal, Panchayat Secretary, who has sworn affidavit Annexure P-6 to the effect that pension was rightly distributed happens to be a government employee, it would not show that the case is false. If the benefit of the social scheme such as old age pension does not reach the persons, who are to be benefitted by the same and is misappropriated in the process of distribution, then it is a very serious matter. The programs of the State are set at naught by people in this manner. If it is the duty of the Sarpanch to prepare

¶25

Crl. Misc. No. M- 3169 of 2013 ----4--

¶26

the record of disbursement of the pension and there is allegation of Lakhi Ram that false record has been prepared showing disbursement of the pension, then Satpal also has a motive to make this affidavit to save his skin. At least the matter requires to be thoroughly investigated to bring the scam to the surface. Therefore, I do not find the petitioner to be entitled to pre-arrest bail.

¶27

The petition is, consequently , dismissed.

¶28

January 30, 2013 (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) dinesh JUDGE

Jitender Dutt v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitender Dutt v. State of Haryana

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

Baljinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Narinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Satnam Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jagroop Singh Vs State of Punjab

Nishan Singh @ Snana & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.