AB 282/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE P K. MUSAHARY Heard Mrs. K.K. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. B.B. Gogo i, learned Addl. PP appearing for the State of Assam. The accused petitioner is implicated in connection with the CID PS Case No. 77/1 0 U/S 120(B)468/471/409/406 IPC. The case diary has been produced to-day. I have gone through the same. The alleg ation in the FIR dated 18.12.10 is that the accused petitioner, the Superintende nt of Police, Dhemaji, did not execute the works namely, construction of police barrack and repairing of vehicles and has mis-appropriated the fund allotted for the purpose. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that due to constant flood and terrorist threat in the said place, the construction work s could not be executed. The materials found in the case diary do not warrant an y leniency and grant of pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioner. Apart from th e case diary, there is a report submitted by the Addl. Superintendent of Police (CID) in the form of a departmental action and as per the said report, the works allotted were not executed by the accused petitioner. In view of the above, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioner. Accordingly, this bail application stands rejected.