IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6507 of 2010 Binay Kumar Choudhary, Son of Late Indeshwari Choudhary, Resident of Village Mauzmabad, P.S. Bihpur, District Bhagalpur, presently posted as Block Agriculture Officer, Mansi Block, P.S. Mansi, District Khagaria. --------- Petitioner Versus State of Bihar ----- Opp. Party ----------- 2 4.3.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner though holding the post of Block Agriculture Officer apprehending his arrest in connection with a police case lodged under Section 420/467/468/384/34 of the Indian Penal Code has his defence that even if the allegation made in the First Information Report is accepted in its entirety, the alleged irregularities committed by him would not amount to any criminal offence, inasmuch as, they would still remain in the domain of disciplinary action. Counsel further submits that the police in course of investigation has found that the dealer in fact even on the basis of the permits issued by the petitioner in capacity of Block Agriculture Officer had not distributed such seeds and therefore, there was no loss to the Government. Counsel for the State on the other hand 2 has submitted that the case diary needs to be called for so that the notes of investigation can reveal the complicity of the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court, there would be no need to look into the case diary, inasmuch as, the First Information Report itself was lodged after a detailed investigation, wherein following discrepancies were found to have been committed by the petitioner:- “1 iath dk lR;kiu Loa; iz[kaM d`f"k inkf/kdkjh] ekulh ds }kjk fd;k x;k gSA 2 fuxZr ijfeV ds vuqlkj iath esa ykHkkfUor d`"kdksa dk dksfVokj] iapk;rokj lwph la/kkfjr ugha gS ftlds dkj.k vjf{kr Js.kh ds d`"kdksa dh la[;k dk lgh&lgh tkudkjh izkIr djuk dfBu gSA 3 iath esa ykHkqd d`"kd ds [ksr dk {ks=Qy vafdr ugha gSA ek= ijfeV esa vafdr@vuq'kalk ds vuqlkj cht iSdsV dh la[;k vafdr gSA 4 iath ds voyksdu ls Li"V gS fd dbZ O;fDr;ksa ds uke ls fuxZr ijfeV ,d gh ykHkqd dks miyC/k djk fn;k x;k gSA 5 dzekad 238 ls 288 rd rFkk 308 ls 390 rd ,oa vU; LFkkuksa ij vafdr d`"kdksa dks fuxZr ijfeV dh lwph esa izkIrdrkZ dk gLrk{kj ugha gSA 6 dzekad 582 ls 631 rd vafdr d`"kdksa dks fuxZr ijfeV dh lwph esa izkIrdrkZ ds :i esa dsoy ,d O;fDr cyohj pUn ;kno dk gLrk{kj vafdr gS blh izdkj dzekad 632 ls 643 rd vafdr d`"kdksa dks fuxZr ijfeV dh lwph esa izkIrdrkZ ds LFkku ij ijekuUn ;kno ,oa ujs'k ;kno dk uke vafdr gSA 7 jk"Vªh; [kkn~; lqj{kk fe'ku vUrxZr] ekulh iz[kaM ds fy, xsgwW cht ohrj.k dk;Zdze gsrq Jh xksiky VªsafMax] ekulh dks ftyk d`f"k inkf/kdkjh [kxfM+;k ds }kjk lac) fd;k x;k gSA 8 tkWp ny }kjk mDr izfr"Bku esa la/kkfjr vfHkys[k dk tkWp dk;Z fd;k x;kA tkWp esa ik;k x;k fd izfr"kBku esa i;kZIr ek=k esa Vh- Mh-lh ,oa ,l- ,Q- lh- vkbZ- ds izekf.kr chp dk dz; fd;k x;k gSA ijUrq muds Lrj ij ik;s x;s ijfeV@fdlku dk vkosnu i= esa iz[kaM d`f"k inkf/kdkjh ekulh dk gLrk{kj vafdr gSA vkosnu i=ksa ds lkFk vuqyXud ewy dS'keseksa esa cht dh ek=k nj] vuqnku dh 3 jkf'k rFkk ykHkkFkhZ ds }kjk Hkqxrs; jde vafdr gSA 9 iz[kaM d`f"k inkf/kdkjh] ekulh Jh fou; dqekj pkS/kjh ls mijksDr vfu;ferrkvksa ds laca/k esa i`PNk fd;s tkus ij crk;k x;k fd dfri; noax O;fDr;ksa }kjk nckc nsdj ijfeV izkIr djus dk dk;Z fd;k x;k gSA** In a case of this nature where the petitioner in capacity of a government officer had been entrusted with public duty, his dealings had to be always fair. In the present case, the only defence of the petitioner is that he had been under threat of the local M.L.A. or her relatives will be of no avail, inasmuch as, no written information to this effect was ever given by the petitioner to the department. Additionally, the defence of the petitioner that seeds actually were not distributed on the basis of the permits issued by the petitioner would not absolve him who was holding a public post. That being so, when the objective findings recorded by the authority prior to the lodging of the First Information Report itself showing sufficient criminal misconduct on the part of the petitioner that by itself would be good enough to at least reject the prayer of the petitioner, namely, Binay Kumar Choudhary, for grant anticipatory bail. 4 Accordingly, this application is dismissed but in the event, the petitioner surrenders and seeks regular bail, the same would be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)