Gautam Das vs The State Of Assam
2021 Latest Caselaw 3591 Gua

                                                                                     Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010180042021




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                    Case No. : AB/3552/2021

            GAUTAM DAS
            S/O LT. TAJENDRA KUMAR DAS
            R/O NILAMBAZAR, UNDER NILAMBAZAR POLICE STATION,
            DIST. KARIMGANJ, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. D GAGAI

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                    BEFORE
                   HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

                                             ORDER

Date : 22-12-2021 Heard Mr. A.M. Bora, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. D. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

This is an application under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, filled by the petitioner viz. Gautam Das in respect of Silchar Police Station Case No. 3136/2021 registered under Sections 120B/ 420/ 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

Page No.# 2/2

The Chief Executive Officer of Cachar Zilla Parishad is the informant of this case.

It has been alleged in the FIR that some persons have misappropriated the Govt. Fund towards execution of MGNREGA in different Gaon Panchayats of Salchapra Development Block. An enquiry was also conducted by the Cachar Zilla Parishad. In the enquiry it is found that the volume and quality of works of the randomly selected MGNREGA Scheme are of poor quality and there is a big difference between the expenditure made and the progress done in the field. The same are also mentioned in the FIR.

Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. PP has submitted that the police is yet to record the statement of the petitioner. Thereby Mr. Sarma suggested that till the statement of the petitioner is recorded, the anticipatory bail prayer of the petitioner should not be considered.

Mr. Bora, learned senior counsel, on the other hand has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 08.11.2021 passed in AB No. 3016/2021. From the aforesaid application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by some other persons in respect of the same Police Station case, this Court has held that there are no such major anomalies in all the Gaon Panchayats wherein the enquiry was conducted. This Court further held that the enquiry conducted by the Enquiry Committee does not indicate anything about the misappropriation of the money. This Court has finally held that if there are any such misappropriation etc. this can be concluded after completion of the entire work.

Today after hearing the learned counsel for both sides and in view of the judgment and order passed by this Court as mentioned above, this Court is of the opinion that on this ground pre-arrest bail application can be allowed.

In view of the above, the interim bail granted to the petitioner on 01.11.2021 is hereby made absolute.

With the above observation, the present bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant