Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Rathindra Kumar Dey vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 7 September, 2022
Author: Bibek Chaudhuri
Bench: Bibek Chaudhuri
07.09.2022
Item No.145.
M/L.
Mithun
Ct.42
CRR 3030 of 2022
Rathindra Kumar Dey
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Mr. Rajdeep Mazumder, Adv.
Mr. Moyukh Mukherjee, Adv.
Mr. Pritam Roy, Adv.
...for the petitioner.
On 26th September, 2019 one Birupakshya
Mitra, W.B.C.S. (Exe.) in his capacity as Block
Development Officer and Programme Officer,
MGNREGA , Beldanga-I Development Block lodged a
written complaint alleging financial defalcation at
Sujapur-Kumarpur Gram Panchayat of Beldanga-I
Development Block alleging, inter alia, that a huge
amount of the schematic fund under MGNREGA had
been withdrawn against which no implementation of
any scheme whatsoever has been done in the field.
The said fund amounting to Rs.4,97,852/- has been
transferred to the accounts of one Eti Chatterjee. It
is further alleged that one Kamal Ghosh, Village
Level Entrepreneur (VLE) made the data entry in the
payment portal using his login ID to make such
payment in favour of the said Eti Chatterjee. It is
also alleged that one Rathindra Kumar Dey, the then
Executive Assistant of the said Gram Panchayat
2
verified the vouchers, measurement books, bill
scheme details and digitally signed in favour of the
payments as mentioned above and he transferred
the said amount despite no such scheme was
actually implemented on the field. It is also alleged
that the said Eti Chatterjee is a near relative of
Rathindra Kumar Dey and no tender process was
initiated by the said Gram Panchayat before the
alleged work order and payments of fund. On the
basis of the said complaint police instituted Beldanga
Police Station Case No.473 of 2019 under Sections
420/406/409/34of the Indian Penal Code and finally submitted charge-sheet on 31st July, 2021 against Kamal Ghosh, VLE of Sujapur-Kumarpur Gram Panchayat, Rathindra Kumar Dey, Executive Assistant of the said Gram Panchayat and Eti Chatterjee, an independent Contractor.
It is pointed out by the learned Advocate for the petitioners that in order to save the local Panchayat Pradhan and other Panchayat Members involved in the racket, the de-facto complainant has diluted the case in his written complaint itself. In support of his contention Mr. Mazumder refers to a Government of West Bengal, Panchayats and Rural Development Department Memo No.1860(21)- RD/O/NREGA/18S-07/06 dated 31st March, 2017 3 wherein the process of disbursement of fund in NREGA scheme at the level of the Gram Panchayat is clearly delineated.
Point No.3 of the aforesaid memo is stated below:-
"In the GP the VLE will be responsible for making data entry in the MIS ranging from registration for job cards to marking works as complete in the MIS for the purpose FTO generation. Moreover, any future requirement of data entry in NREGASoft and related software systems, including any such system introduced by the State Government will be addressed by the VLE. However, no digital signature certificate will be in the custody of the VLE and the final authority of signing the FTOs (Fund Transfer Order) will lie on the Executive Assistant/Secretary as 'maker' and the Pradhan as 'checker'."
Surprisingly enough the Gram Panchayat Pradhan of the concerned GP has not been named as an accused.
At the same time the Investigating Officer did not seize any document either in soft version or by hard copy to prove the allegation.
It is also mentioned by Mr. Mazumder that all expenditures during the relevant period was 4 audited by the Office of the Principal Accountant General (Audit-I) and the Senior Audit Officer submitted his report on 26th October, 2021. The audit report shows that there was no incident of theft, fraud defalcation etc. occurred during 2017-
18. At page 73 the qualified opinion of the examiner of Local Accounts, Audit Branch are annexed, on perusal of which nothing was detected in respect of the defalcation of the amount. However, from the FIR it is found that a sum Rs.4,97,852/- was defalcated and it was transferred in the accounts of Eti Chatterjee.
It is expected that the de-facto complainant does not know about the guidelines made by the Government of West Bengal in Memo No.1860 dated 31st March, 2017. It appears to this Court that the Pradhan of the said Gram Panchayat was given undue advantage by the Executive Authority and prima facie this is an instance where Political Executive freely dance over the head of the Administrative Executive.
Therefore, considering the documents and averments made in the instant revision, relying on Paragraph 40 of Babubhai Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. Reported in (2010) 12 SCC 254 , this Court is of the view that further investigation by an 5 independent authority holistically is necessary to unearth the truth. Therefore, C.I.D., Economic Wing, Government of West Bengal is directed to investigate into the case specially on the question of involvement of Rathindra Kumar Dey and the Local Gram Panchayat Pradhan in view of the guidelines made by the Government of West Bengal, Panchayats and Rural Development vide a Memo No.1860 dated 31st March, 2017.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Calcutta in course of this day directing him to send the order to the highest authority of the CID, Government of West Bengal for compliance of the direction.
CID, Government of West Bengal is directed to submit fortnightly report before this Court until further order.
The petitioner and the opposite party No.2 are directed to cooperate with the Investigating Agency.
It is also within the scope of investigation by the CID to ascertain as to whether the Investigating Officer of this case proposes to prove the charge without seizure of any document.
It is further directed that the CID will investigate as to how the higher authorities of 6 District Police Authority in the District of Murshidabad permits the Investigating Officer to file a charge-sheet in a case involving commission of offence under Sections 420/406/409/34 of the Indian Penal Code without any document being seized.
In view of the above order, further proceeding in respect of the G.R. Case No.4246 of 2019 be stayed until further order.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)