Jharkhand High Court
Ashutosh Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. ... on 19 April, 2022
Author: Subhash Chand
Bench: Subhash Chand
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.1283 of 2022
Ashutosh Kumar ..... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Chandana Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl. P.P.
--------
05/19.04.2022 Heard learned senior counsel for the applicant and learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Ms. Chandana Kumari, learned assisting counsel to Mr. Anil Kumar, learned senior counsel for the applicant undertakes to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office within a period of one week.
3. This bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with prayer to release on bail in connection with Sadar (Chatra) P.S. Case No.165 of 2018 registered under Sections 467, 468, 461, 471, 420, 409, 406, 120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act pending in the court of learned Special Judge, ACB, Hazaribag.
4. Learned senior counsel for the applicant has submitted that the first information report of this case was lodged on the basis of letter no.367 dated 8th June, 2018 of Executive Magistrate-cum-In-Charge, District Welfare Officer, Chatra with these allegations that after arson only three cash book registers have been opened on the basis of last balance in the account of S.B.I., Chatra, I.D.B.I., Chatra and Bank of India, Chatra for withdrawal of government money by Mr. Ashutosh Kumar, Executive Magistrate-cum-EX District Welfare Officer, Chatra and continued to withdraw the money illegally and no official information was ever given in -2- regard to burning of the cash book registers and cheque book. It is further alleged that prior to arson, 12 bank accounts were running in different banks in the name of District Welfare Officer. On 23rd November, 2017, Mr. Bholanath Laguri had taken charge from said Ashutosh Kumar on second time and all these facts were also known to his predecessor Ashutosh Kumar. Both the said officers under a conspiracy with Nazir Indradeo Prasad and Head Clerk Sri Kashi Prasad Gupta had been withdrawing the government money illegally and the same was being transferred to the accounts of Nazir and his family members i.e., his wife Sunita Devi, daughters Chanda Prasad and Tara Prasad, sons Suraj Prasad and Prithvi Prasad and other persons. It is also alleged that the government money was also being transferred to the accounts of PRAYAS NGO, CENWORD (registered in the name of wife and other family members of Nazir, Chatra Institute of Technology, Ananya Infotech, Virat Telecom, Ashish Kumar, Rupa Devi, Mithlesh Mishra (retired Block Welfare Officer) and other persons.
5. Mr. Anil Kumar, learned senior counsel for the applicant has submitted that no alleged illegal withdrawal of the amount to the tune of Rs.6,50,000/- was made during the tenure of the applicant. The inquiry report reveals that entire key role had been played by Indradeo Prasad, Nazir. The alleged illegal withdrawal of money was transferred in the account of Indradeo Prasad, his wife, his daughter and sons. It is further submitted that it was Indradeo Prasad, Nazir who was authorized to submit the cheque before the concerned bank. It is also submitted that not a single penny was transferred in the account of the applicant. The applicant had also taken action and lodged a first information report on 2nd November, 2017 when the incident of burning took place. The -3- applicant had not put his signature on cheque nos.490320, 490317 as well as in the F.I.R. and said signatures were forged. The work order were issued in favour of the NGOs prior to joining of the applicant. It is also submitted that main accused - Indradeo Prasad in whose account, the amount was transferred has already been granted bail by a co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26th November, 2020 passed in B.A. No.4042 of 2020. It is further submitted that similarly situated co-accused persons, namely, Preethivi Prasad, Suraj Prasad @ Vikash Prasad, Chanda Prasad @ Tulsi Prasad, Tuntun Kumar Mehta and Tara Prasad have already been granted bail by the different co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 23.02.2021, 08.07.2021, 11.08.2021, 13.07.2021 and 11.08.2021 passed in B.A. Nos.1553 of 2021, 5661 of 2021, 5667 of 2021, 5951 of 2021 and 5669 of 2021 respectively. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail since 4th December, 2021 and he may be given the privilege of regular bail.
6. Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Special Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned senior counsel for the applicant and contended that during inquiry it was revealed that Mr. Ashutosh Kumar, the then District Welfare Officer, Chatra had ordered vide letter no.174 dated 31st March, 2017 to transfer the amount of scholarship in the account of school management committee and the names of the schools which were mentioned in the schedule out of them seven schools of Chatra, District were not in existence and the amount which was transferred in the bank accounts were in the name of Nazir Indradeo Prasad, his wife Sunita Devi, daughters, Chanda Prasad, Tara Prasad and Kumari Tulsi. In the account of District Welfare Officer, Chatra -4- the amount of Rs.2,07,36,264/- was in balance and out of the same Rs.1.25 crore was transferred on 19th August, 2017 in the account of Nazir Indradeo Prasad, his family members and NGO. It is further submitted that as such during tenure of the applicant Rs.6.50 crore was defalcated and same was transferred in the bank accounts of said persons. Lastly, learned A.P.P. submitted that admittedly no amount, out of defalcated money was transferred in the account of the present applicant or his relatives; but the defalcation /embezzlement took place during his tenure.
7. In view of the submissions made and materials on record, the bail application of the applicant is, hereby, allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in aforesaid case.
(Subhash Chand, J.) Rohit