IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9807 of 2010 PRABHAKAR LAL DAS S/O LATE SUKDEO LAL DAS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KANDAHA, P.S. MAHISHI, DISTRICT SAHARASHA …. PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. VIGILANCE BUREAU, PATNA …. OPPOSITE PARTIES ----------- 2. 3.12.2010 The petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 11.2.2010 passed by the Special Judge Vigilance (Trap), Patna in Spl. Case No.1 of 2006/ 109 of 2008 arising out of Vigilance Case No.5 of 2006, by which he has refused to discharge the petitioner. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that two lacs rupees recovered from the petitioner’s office almirah while he was posted as Nazir in the office of the D.D.C. was not bribe money and it was not tainted and, therefore, he should not be prosecuted. He also submits that the petitioner was not named in the statement recorded u/s.164 Cr.P.C. of co-accused Bachneshwar Jha, who is sought to be made an approver in the present case. On going through the statement recorded u/s.164 Cr.P.C., I find that co-accused Bachneshwar Jha specifically stated that the Director used to take 30% of the bribe money and the rest 30% used to be distributed among the staff of the office. This certainly included the petitioner since he was the Nazir in that office. 2 In view of such, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. The application is dismissed. Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )