IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11419 of 2010 SMT. VIMLA DEVI WIFE OF DEVENDRA PRASAD NAYAK, MUKHIA, GRAM PANCHAYAT, BASUDEOPUR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ARNAMA, POLICE STATION, LAUKAHA, DISTRICT MADHUBANI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR 2 3-5-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. From the FIR it appears that in course of inspection of Basudeopur Panchayat financial irregularities in various schemes were detected for which the Sub-divisional Officer, Phulparas gave a detailed enquiry report on 17-2-09 in which he found Mukhiya, that is, the present petitioner and another accused, Panchayat Sevak to be involved. The District Magistrate in the light of aforesaid report of Sub- divisional Officer directed for lodging an official case which has resulted into the present case under sections 420, 406, 409, 467, 468, 469, 120(B)/34 of the IPC. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that Dy S.P has doubted the involvement of the petitioner in course of investigation which is going on and that the petitioner being a lady should be granted anticipatory bail. In view of detailed enquiry report submitted by the S.D.O on the basis whereof the District Magistrate has - 2 - authorized for lodging the present case for financial irregularities in various schemes relating to the Gram Panchayat of which petitioner is Mukhiya, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. This order shall not prejudice the case of petitioner if she surrenders and seeks regular bail on all the grounds, particularly on the ground that she is a lady. BKS/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)