IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.31743 of 2008 SURESH PRASAD YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 5. 6.1.2009 Heard Sri Praveen Kr. Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The case has been registered under Sections 409, 420 etc IPC in respect of the alleged defalcation of amount in respect of a particular scheme as per details given in the FIR. It may appear that the estimated cost of the scheme was Rs.8,15,400/- only and that was completed in the year, 1999 itself but still cheques, account payee or bearer, were issued showing payment of different amounts towards the cost of implementing the scheme. The total payment made, was Rs.14,01,500/-. Thus as per the allegation, an excess amount of Rs.5,86,100/- was made in connivance with different employees and officers of Kumarkhand Development Block. The contention is that the petitioner had nothing to do with the scheme and he does not know as to how he was projected as the Executing Agent of the scheme. It is further - 2 - contended that the claim of the prosecution which is made basically in the FIR that the petitioner had received the cheques or other instruments indicating amount of different sums of money to the petitioner, is false and fabricated and it appears a case of defalcation by the officers, committed by setting up a fictitious unknown persons in place of the petitioner. The court could have accepted the contention had there been no payment through account payee cheque. The court accepted the contention in respect of the bearer cheques as the same could be encashed by all and sundry, but in case of account payee cheques, the court could not have any other option but to accept that the cheque could have been encashed only by the account holder, thats, the petitioner. It appears to be a solid case of misappropriation of government money. Petition is dismissed. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )