ANKITKUMAR CHETANKUMAR PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed under sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for bail in connection with FIR being No.11822009210563 of 2021 registered with Chikhli Police Station, Navsari, for offences punishable under Ss. 406, 409, 420, 204, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Mr. Zubin Bharda, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the present petitioner is a Sarpanch and the allegation is made about forging the signature of Talati on the cheque books but no such allegations are made by the complainant. Mr. Zubin Bharda, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the Talati in whose custody the cheque book remains has been granted bail and other coaccused in whose account the money came to be deposited are also on bail. 2.1 Mr. Zubin Bharda, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the complainant in her complaint dated 23/04/2021 alleges that on 12.04.2021 the applicant Diptiben Rakeshbhai Shah and others came and inquired about the complaint given to TDO, Chikhli, with respect to embezzlement in 14th Finance Commission Scheme, and for that purpose a team was constituted to file a report, and during the inquiry the complainant and her team called upon Talati-cum-Mantri, Gram Panchayat Chikhli to produce the record and information regarding 14th Finance Commission Scheme as well as other necessary information and also addressed a letter dated 17.04.2021 to the Bank Manager, Axis bank, Chikhli, calling upon him to furnish the details with regard to bank account of Chikhli Gram Panchayat in respect to the amount credited and debited under 14th Finance Commission Scheme. It was alleged that the Talati-cum-Mantri had only furnished part information, and upon perusing the details produced, some irregularities was found with respect to the fund received by Chikhli Gram Panchayat under 14th Finance Commission Scheme for the year 2015-2016 to 15/04/2021. 2.2 Mr. Bharda, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the Taluka Panchayat, Chikhli, gave administrative approval of 111 works to be carried out by Gram Panchayat; out of which only 69 works had been completed whereas although there was administrative approval for rest of 42 works has been issued but no work was carried out and nor any completion certificate was issued by Taluka Panchayat; and accordingly allegation is made that Rs.70,80,882.00 came to to be misappropriated as per the report of the inquiry team. 2.3 Mr. Bharda, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that it is on the joint signature of Sarpanch and Talati-cumMantri and on the resolution of the Managing Committee of Gran Panchayat; this amount would be directed to be paid. He stated that the cheque book would remain in custody of Talaticum-Mantri and every work undertaken would be in accordance with the resolution passed by the Managing Committee. 2.4 Mr. Bharda, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the completion work would be on record and approved by Engineers and thereafter the work completion certificate will be issued, and therefore, it would be the joint responsibility of all concerned and thus stated that on that ground the discretion should be exercised to grant the bail.

(3.) Countering the argument, learned APP submitted that, infact out of 111 approved work, only 69 works were found to be completed and though 42 works are to be approved the amount but in fact no such work was carried out and the said amount were found to be misappropriated. Learned APP submitted that it is the prime responsibility of the Sarpanch of the village to have examine the fact of completion of work and then could have resolved about the same. Learned APP submitted that it is a case of misappropriation of Rs.70,80,882.00 which is a public money; and thus stated that the application be rejected.