RAMESH DEVRAO GUTTE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Application No. 3409, 3410, 3429, 3496 of 2013 are filed in C.R. No. 15/2013 registered in Mukhed Police Station, District Nanded. This crime is registered in respect of the work executed in Gavthan of village Akharaga. Criminal Application Nos. 2960, 3209, 3165, 3080 of 2013 are filed in C.R. No. 23/2013 registered in Loha Police Station, District Nanded and Criminal Application Nos. 2992, 2986, 1992, 1923 and 2852 of 2013 are filed in C.R. No. 13/2013 registered in Mukhed Police Station, District Nanded. All the applications are filed for relief of anticipatory bail. Both the sides are heard.

(2.) There is allegation of misappropriation of Government money and there is also allegation of creation of false record in respect of work executed and in respect of labour force used for execution of the work. These works were executed under National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme and Maharashtra Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. All the crimes came to be registered after giving directions by concern Judicial Magistrate, First Class under section 156 (3) of Criminal Procedure Code in private complaints filed by some persons of the respective regions. Initially the investigation was being carried by the concern police stations. When many such instances were noticed, the investigation came to be handed over to crime branch. The crimes are registered for offences punishable under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 34 etc. of I.P.C.

(3.) The counsel appearing for the applicants referred the provisions of Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Act, 1977, National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 and Maharashtra Amendment Act, 2006 which amended Maharashtra Employment Guarantee Act, 1977. Both the sides showed some Government Resolutions, Circulars and letters issued by the concern department of the Government for implementing the schemes and the provisions of the aforesaid Acts. It can be said that the Officers are trying to blame each other and submissions were advanced to the effect that there was no responsibility of the Officers who have come to the Court in respect of execution of the work or the creation of the record. It was submitted for the Members of Gram Panchayat that the Revenue Officers and Officers of Zilla Parishad are responsible for everything and on the other hand, argument was advanced for Tahsildar, Block Development Officer (B.D.O.), Agricultural Officer that it was responsibility of Gram Panchayat. Some of the applicants are also from technical side and they are working with Zilla Parishad and it was submitted for them that they had no administrative power with regard to sanction of the amount and so, they cannot be held responsible.