IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20096 of 2008 SUDARSHAN RAM Versus STATE OF BIHAR THRO.VIGI. ----------- 3. 15.7.2008 Heard. Petitioner while being posted as officer-in-charge of Chakia police station, as per the allegation, went on to construct a Hanuman Temple and as per the allegation, formed a Construction Committee which consisted of some of the big names in the criminality of the district of East Champaran. Extortions of huge amount were complained of by the members of the Committee at the behest of the present petitioner so much so that it was a collection allegedly around Rs.20 lacs. There was an in-house enquiry and the allegation appears to be true and that resulted in filing of the report. Petitioner’s prayer for anticipatory bail was dismissed in Miscellaneous petition no.27123 of 2007 and petitioner is now in custody after dismissal of the S.L.P. by the Apex Court as appears from Annexure-2. It was contended by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that Superintendent of Police, East Champaran , initially found the allegation true and that two persons Birendra Mishra and Ali Bidrohi might have some bad antecedents but rest of the Committee members were respected persons and there was no clear material to indicate that it was not a voluntary contribution of contributors rather extortions. This Court had occasion through another Bench to have noticed the facts of the case and to refuse the - 2 - prayer for anticipatory bail and that order in least contentions of the parties and for information of the court as presently this stand is indicated by in-house enquiry report as also the F.I.R. that petitioner being public servant utilized his position which was quite some important in amassing properties which could also be found in the possession of the petitioners, in his bank account. The F.I.R. and other materials indicate that petitioner sought and received contributions for constructing a temple through persons who were accused in offences, like , murder, dacoity etc. and there was a complaint from general public about the manner the contributions were extracted. Considering the mere facts of the case, I am not inclined presently to direct release of the petitioner from custody. The petition is dismissed. sudip (Dharnidhar Jha, J )