RAJBALA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Offence alleged is under sections 420/120-B IPC. Counsel for the petitioner says that the petitioner was a Sarpanch and on 29.8.2005, a sum of Rs.1,23,414/- was alleged to have been misappropriated by her and she was required to deposit the same, which she had deposited. Thereafter, it was alleged that the petitioner had embezzled more amounts, for which enquiry has been held by Economic Cell of the police department, but no enquiry has been held under the Panchayati Raj Act by the department.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner further submits that without giving an opportunity to the petitioner, arrest of the petitioner is not called for; she is willing to pay any amount that may be determined under the provisions of Panchayati Raj Act or may be found due in any other legal proceedings she is also willing to join investigation and face proceedings in accordance with law.