Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Patna High Court - Orders

Ajitabh Suman vs The State Of Bihar Through The Vigilance ... on 21 September, 2017

Author: Sanjay Priya

Bench: Sanjay Priya

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                   Criminal Miscellaneous No.28537 of 2017
                   Arising Out of PS.Case No. -533 Year- 2011 Thana -BHABHUA District- BHABHUA (KAIMUR)
                  ======================================================
                  1. Ajitabh Suman, son of Ram Iqbal Singh, resident of village-Avari, P.S.-
                     Mohaniya, Dist.-Kaimur
                                                                      .... .... Petitioner/s

                                                        Versus

                  1. The State of Bihar through the Vigilance Department, Bihar
                                                                     .... .... Opposite Party/s
                  ======================================================
                  Appearance :
                  For the Petitioner/s        :   Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
                  For the Opposite Party/s    : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, LO, I/c, Vigilance
                  ======================================================
                  CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA
                  ORAL ORDER

5/   21-09-2017

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the Vigilance.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Bhabua P.S. Case No.533 of 2011 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 420, 409, 467, 468, 471/34 and 120-B Indian Penal Code and Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act pending in the Court of the Special Judge, Vigilance, 1st, Patna.

Instant case has been instituted by the Informant, Ras Bihari Singh, Civil Surgeon, Kaimur, Bhabhua, alleging that co-accused, Uchit Lal Mandal, being the Civil Surgeon committed financial irregularities of the huge amount to the tune of crores. As per the letter dated 22.07.2011 of the District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, District Health Society, Kaimur, as Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28537 of 2017 (5) dt.21-09-2017 2/5 well as Audit Report bearing No.05/2011-12 of the State Health Committee, Bihar, it is apparent that several irregularities were found during course of audit. It was found that Dr. Uchit Lal Mandal made payment to the tune of Rs.5.50 crores to the NGOs, Private Nursing Homes, Private Hospital and Private Doctors under the Family Planning (Sterilization) Scheme and the Mother and Child Security Scheme without obtaining the prior permission from the District Magistrate-cum-Chairman of the District Health Society. It is alleged against this petitioner that he is a BAMS doctor and he was running Tathagat Poly Clinic, Bhitthi, Mohania. Petitioner was President of the aforesaid Health Centre. The petitioner received Rs.3,97,500/- for sterilization operation and Rs.1,30,500/- for safe delivery. The petitioner took payment of sterilization of two ladies showing their husband to be the same. It is further alleged that on physical verification by the IO the aforesaid clinic of the petitioner was found non-existent. Further allegation against this petitioner is that his NGO violated the instructions as given in the Letter No.4437 dated 26.05.2017 of the State Health Society and also not paid Rs.150/- per operation to the motivators. The IO during investigation came to know that petitioner used to live in Varanasi.

3/5

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that for sterilization work he has done work for Rs.3,97,500/- and for the safe delivery, work has been done for Rs.1,30,500/- The petitioner has shifted to Varanasi and left the Clinic, which had been taken by him on rent from one Dharmendra Singh, who is lawyer by profession. Petitioner has left the place in 2013 itself and, therefore, during investigation, the hospital was not found at the spot.

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that co- accused, Uchit Lal Mandal, has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.09.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. No.27053 of 2012. Similarly, another co- accused, Dr. Idrish Jauher @ Md. Idrish Johar, has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.02.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No.55553 of 2016. It has been further been submitted that co-accused, Dr. Dineshwar Singh @ Mantu Singh, has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 06.07.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No.29929 of 2017.

Counsel for the Vigilance has submitted that petitioner is a BAMS doctor and he was running Tathagat Poly Clinic, Bhitthi, Mohania. He was President of the aforesaid Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28537 of 2017 (5) dt.21-09-2017 4/5 Health Centre. The petitioner received Rs.3,97,500/- for sterilization operation and Rs.1,30,500/- for safe delivery. The petitioner took payment of sterilization of two ladies showing their husband to be the same. It is further alleged that on physical verification by the IO the aforesaid clinic of the petitioner was found non-existent. Further allegation against this petitioner is that his NGO violated the instructions as given in the Letter No.4437 dated 26.05.2017 of the State Health Society and also not paid Rs.150/- per operation to the motivators. The IO during investigation came to know that petitioner used to live in Varanasi. Counsel for the Vigilance has referred para 477 and 479 of the case diary and submitted that there is sufficient material in these paragraphs to show the involvement of the petitioner.

Counsel for the Vigilance has further submitted that prayer for anticipatory bail of other co-accused has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 03.04.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No.4082 of 2017 with Cr. Misc. No.10772 of 2017 and also vide order dated 01.03.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No.1809 of 2017.

From the order dated 12.09.2012 passed in Cr. Misc. No.27053 of 2012, by which co-accused, Uchit Lal Mandal, was granted anticipatory bail, it appears that the materials in the case Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28537 of 2017 (5) dt.21-09-2017 5/5 diary was not brought to the notice of the Court at that time.

Keeping in view serious nature of allegation against the petitioner, this Court does not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

Prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.

Petitioner may surrender before the Court below and seek regular bail, which shall be considered and disposed off in accordance with law on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Sanjay Priya, J) JA/-

U      T