ASHOK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Crl. Misc. No. 27518 of 1998 whereby Ashok Kumar and Manjit SinghPetitioners have prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to them in case FIR No. 160 dated 24-10-1997 registered under Sections 409/420/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Ss. 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act at Police Station Guhla.

(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that Government sanctioned a sum of Rs. 2,17,75,000/- for distribution amongst flood victims of 103 villages of Tehsil Guhla. Disbursement was made through cheques to the flood victims varying Rs. 2,000/- each to Rs. 4,000/- each. Disbursement was made to about 400 flood victims in villages namely Tatiana. Peedal and Kasaur. According to the complaint made to the Deputy Commissioner, the allegation against Ashok Kumar-petitioner No.1 (who was Patwari) was that he by wrongly entering in the survey list of damaged tubewells the names of Sri Krishan son of Shri Keeru and Jaila Ram son of Sadhu got the compensation amount distributed under Nos. 170 and 171 of APR whereas both the above persons were not the owners of land in village Peedal and Ashok Kumar Patwari embezzled the Govt. money by getting compensation amount paid to wrong persons. Perusal of the record revealed that according to the survey list Sri Krishan son of Keeru and Jaila Ram had been given compensation amount by getting them enlisted at 170 and 171. Sh. Ashok Kumar. Patwari took the stand that both those persons were agriculturists of village Peedal according to the revenue record and produced copy of khasra girdawari in support of his submission. Perusal of the record revealed that Sri Krishan son of Keeru whose name was registered at Sr. No. 171 of APR was in possession of land bearing Khasra Nos. 116/9. 10, 11, 12, 13 as Pattedar and similarly the name of the Jaila Ram son of Sadhu Ram which was registered at No.171 was in possession of land bearing Khasra Nos. 116/3, 4, 7, 8 as pattedar agriculturist, Ashok Kumari Patwari produced Mohinder Singh son of Rangi Ram owner of the land which was being cultivated by Krishan and Jaila on Patta. Mohinder Singh stated that tubewells were existing in their land which was being cultivated by Krishan and Jaila on Patta and there was an agreement between them that tubewells were to be handed over back in the same position, these had been taken.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the landowners themselves admitted that the Pattedars had rightly obtained compensation amount and they had no objection, it was improper to say that Ashok Kumar had embezzled the Government money by getting compensation amount received in the names of wrong persons. Another allegation against Ashok Kumar Patwari was that he was shown to have handed over the cheques to Shri Indraj at Sr. Nos. 60, 106, Shri Mammu Ram at Sr. Nos. 155 and 158. Shri Subhash son of Bhuria at Sr. No. 48 of APR of village Peedal. In the enquiry Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) Guhla found that these persons had received the cheques. Similarly, regarding the persons at Sr. Nos. 140, 244, 214, 211, 153, 106, 139 and 149 who were shown to have received the cheques, it was found by the SDM, Guhla that these persons had not been handed over the cheques. The amount was embezzled by giving the cheques to some other persons in place of those persons. According to Ashok Kumar patwari, Shri Rajinder Kumar of a village Peedal was present before the cheques were distributed and Tehsildar himself distributed the cheques in village in open gathering of the village on the identification of Sarpanch. Lambardar and Deputy Sarpanch of the village. Shri Gian Parkash the then Tehsildar, Guhla also stated in his statement that those cheques were distributed in the presence of general public after identification by Sarpanch, Deputy Sarpanch and Lambardar, Sarpanch, Deputy Sarpanch and Lambardar admitted in their statements that cheques had been distributed in their presence on their identification. It was found that the cheques had been distributed by Sh. Gian Parkash Tehsildar, Guhla on the identification of Sarpanch, Deputy Sarpanch and Lambardar. Another allegation against Ashok Kumar Patwari was that he had not prepared the list of damaged tubewells according to the Government instructions, whereas according to the instructions verification by at-least two out of the Sarpanch of village, Deputy Sarpanch Panches and Lambardar was must. On the survey list, he got verification done only from the Deputy Chairman, Block Samiti Cheeka. He thus embezzled Government money by preparing documents in disregard of the instructions. On the perusal of the survey list, it was found that thumb impressions/signatures of Mohinder Singh, Deputy Sarpanch were existing. It was thus clear that the verification was got done from two respectable people of the village, which was in accord with the Government instructions. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that SDO (Civil). Kaithal did not find any of the allegations proved against Ashok Kumar - petitioner No. 1,