High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ram Uchit Sah vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 26 October, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Ram Uchit Sah vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 26 October, 2010


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.14232 of 2009

RAM UCHIT SAH, S/O Prabhu Lal Sah, Resident of Village Raipur, P.S. Ujiarpur, District
Samastipur.

……….Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR
………Opposite Party

For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Dlip Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the State : Mr. U.S.P. Singh, A.P.P.

04/- 26-10-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Additional

Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make

necessary correction regarding opposite party no. 3

This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of order dated 24.07.2008

passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dalsingsarai in

Ujiarpur P.S. Case No. 151 of 2004 taking cognizance for the offences

under Section 409, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

It is pointed out that the case was instituted against the

petitioner and others with an allegation that they have released Rs.

15,000/- for construction of community hall, but when the scheme was

recalled, in spite of notice money was not been returned rather some

act towards construction was done on a school land. The police after

investigation submitted final form stating therein that the case is of

mistake of fact and the contractor earlier has already deposited the

money taken in advance.

-2-

From the impugned order it appears that court below found

deposit of money in account no. 1640 running in the Shetriya Gramin

Bank, but the account was in the name of contractor whereas fact is

altogether different. The aforesaid account runs in the name of Gram

Panchayat, where in Rs. 2,000/- was deposited on 4.11.2004 vide

Annexure-3 and earlier vide Annexure-2 Rs. 13,000/- appears

deposited in cash on 06.03.2004 (Annexure-2). Both the deposits find

mentioned in the account book of the Gram Panchayat. On basis of all

such materials couple with finding of the court below that there was

no material against either of the accused. Learned Additional Public

Prosecutor fairly concedes that no case is made out against the

accused persons.

Accordingly, the impugned order is hereby quashed and this

petition stands allowed at this stage.

Praveen                                            (Akhilesh Chandra, J.)