AB 2535/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. BARUAH. Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B,S . Sinha, learned Addl. P.P, who accepts notice for and on behalf of State of Ass am. This is a second application made under Section 438 Cr. P.C by the peti tioner. The earlier application being AB No. 1967 of 2011 filed by the petitione r was disposed of by order dated 10-8-2011. By that order the aforesaid applicat ion was dismissed. By this instant second application the petitioner, Abdul Malik prays to provide him the privilege of pre arrest bail in connection with Dhula P.S Case N o. 110 of 2011 registered under Section 409/34 IPC. Mr. M. K. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel in support of the application c ontends that the petitioner is the President of Pub Mangaldoi Anchalik Panchayat and he is discharing his duties as such with utmost sincerity and without any b lemish whatsoever from any corner. Moreover, the petitioner has a good reputatio n in the locality as well as in the office. The allegations brought in, in the F irst Information Report by the Block Development Officer, Pub Mangaldai Dev. Blo ck, Dhula against this petitioner are all unfounded and made by the first inform ant in order to save his skin. Mr. Choudhury referring the Clause No. 8.5.1 of t he Operational Guidelines, 2008, 3rd Edition, of the National Rural Employment G uarantee Act, 2005 (NREGA) submits that the President and the Secretary of the e ach of the Gaon Panchayats are responsible for the NREGA’s account to be maintai ned in the bank for the purpose of implementing NREGA’s works. The petitioner he rein being the President of the Pub Mangaldoi Anchalik Panchayat is not responsi ble for the such bank account and, therefore, there would be no opportunity on t he part of the petitioner herein to misappropriate any amount lying in the bank account. It is also submitted by Mr. Choudhury, that the construction work was m ainly looked after by one Biren Kalita, a Jr. Engineer of Pub Mangaldoi Anchalik Panchayat now transferred to Nao Boisa Dev. Block, Dist.-Lakhimpur and he is mo stly responsible for non-payment of wages to the labourers and the VMC against c onstruction of the road from Sabed Ali’s house to Parghat under MGNREGs 2008-20 09. At no point of time, it is argued by Mr. Choudhury that the present petition er being the President of Pub Mangaldoi Anchalik Panchayat was in the possession of the joint account and for that the allegations made against the petitioner t hat he also misappropriated the amount meant for the labourers engaged for const ruction of the road as indicated above are all false and fabricated. Mr. Choudhu ry further submits that the inquiry conducted by BDO, the first informant himsel f cannot receive any appreciation since he being the informant himself conducted such inquiry. Mr. Choudhury, under these facts submits that the petitioner here in is entitled to privilege of pre arrest bail. Mr. B.S. Sinha, learned Addl. P.P while arguing submits that into the al legations an inquiry was also conducted by the Extension Officer, such inquiry r eport, however, according to Mr. B.S. Sinha, learned Addl. P.P has not totally i nvolved the petitioner herein in the misappropriation of the fund. Mr. Sinha sub mits that the Jr. Engineer of Pub Mangaldoi Anchalik Panchayat received the cheq ue and he was in full charge of the execution of the construction of the road. R eferring to the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Cr. P.C, Mr. Sinha also submits that nothing substantial is forthcoming from the st atements as against the petitioner in regard to his involvement in misappropriat ion of the fund. Taking note all the facts and the materials available in the case diary in its entirety, this court finds force in the submissions advanced by Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, the application made under Section 438 Cr. P.C stands allowed. In the event of arrest of the petitioner above named in connection with aforesaid case, he shall be released on bail for Rs. 20,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with th e following conditions: (1) that the petitioner shall assist the Investigating Officer of this case in the proper and complete investigation of the same; (2) that the petitioner shall not indulge any other activities prejudicial t o the investigation of the case; and (3) that the petitioner shall appear before the I.O within a period of 5(fiv e) days from today for recording of his statement. With the above direction, this application stands disposed of.