IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.529 of 2008 UPENDRA NATH VERMA, S/O SRI BINDESHWARI PRASAD, R/O VILLAGE-BELHARI, TOLA BALUA, P.O.-BELHARI, P.S.-BELAGANJ IN THE DISTRICT OF GAYA. …………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, PATNA ZONE, PATNA. 5. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, MAGADH PRAMANDAL, GAYA. 6. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, MAGADH RANGE, MAGADH. 7. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, GAYA. 8. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GAYA. 9. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GAYA. 10. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SADAR GAYA, DISTRICT-GAYA. 11. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BELGAGANJ, DISTRICT-GAYA. 12. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BELAGANJ, DISTRICT-GAYA. 13. ANITA DEVI, W/O SRI RAMESH BHARTI, R/O VILLAGE-BELHARI TOLA BALUA, P.O.-BELHARI, P.S.- BELAGANJ IN THE DISTRICT OF GAYA. 14. RAMESH BHARTI, S/O LATE DEOKI BHARTI, R/O VILLAGE-BELHARI TOLA BALUA, P.O.-BELHARI, P.S.- BELAGANJ IN THE DISTRICT OF GAYA. 15. NARESH PASWAN, S/O SRI RAMESHWAR PASWAN, R/O VILLAGE-BELHARI TOLA BALUK BIGHA, P.S.- BELAGANJ IN THE DISTRICT OF GAYA. 16. SADRUDDIN MIAN, S/O (PRESENTLY NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIOENR), R/O VILLAGE-SINDANI, P.O.- BELHARI, P.S.-BELAGANJ IN THE DISTRICT OF GAYA. 17. JAIKAR SHARMA, S/O LATE ARJUN SHARMA, R/O VILLAGE-BELHARI, P.O.-BELHARI, P.S.-BELAGANJ IN THE DISTRICT OF GAYA. 18. MALLU YADAV, S/O SRI FEKAN YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-BELHARI, TOLA BALUA, P.O.-BELHARI, P.S.-BELAGANJ IN THE DISTRICT OF GAYA. 19. LALMUNI YADAV, S/O LATE DEOLAL YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-BELHARI TOLA BALUK, P.O.-BELHARI, P.S.- BELAGANJ IN THE DISTRICT OF GAYA. 20. AJAY YADAV, S/O SRI MOTI YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-BELHARI, TOLA BULAK BIGHA, P.O.- BELHARI, P.S.-BELAGANJ IN THE DISTRICT OF GAYA. ……………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 4 14.05.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2 This writ application has been filed for a direction to the respondent concerned to institute First Information Report for alleged defalcation and misappropriation of Government money in executing different schemes under the Belhari Panchayat, Belgaganj Block in the District of Gaya. The petitioner alleged that with the connivance of the private contractors the officials of the Panchayat have defalcated huge public money and have misappropriated the same instead of spending it properly for completion of schemes. Counter affidavit has been filed in the case from which it appears that some misappropriation and defalcation of money is admitted. It also appears that enquiry was held and the allegation was found true. Thereafter, on the recommendation of the BDO an FIR has now been instituted against certain persons who were found guilty of said misappropriation and defalcation of public money in the preliminary enquiry held by the officials. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this FIR is just a eye-wash as in the recommendation of the BDO for institution 3 of FIR the main culprits who are the Government or Panchayat officials have been left out and some of the private agencies have also been left out. Mere institution of the FIR accusing some of the persons as prima facie guilty of offence of defalcation and misappropriation, does not debar the police in holding investigation of the entire offences committed in conspiracy with other persons. In case during the investigation the police finds that apart from the persons claimed in the report other Government or Panchayat officials are also involved in the matter, the police is always at liberty to take steps for issuance of processes against them and submit charge sheet against them also. Since in the investigation the police has ample powers to investigate the entire case, this Court is not inclined to make any specific observations or any specific direction to the police to take steps against the said officials at this stage itself. If, during the investigation the police gets sufficient materials in this regard it is at liberty to take further steps in the matter. 4 It goes without saying that authorities of the Government will also be at liberty to take steps for recovery of the defalcated and misappropriated amount from the persons concerned if after a proper enquiry they are found responsible for the same. With the above observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)