POONAM KUMARI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sequel to order dated 28.5.2019, whereby bail petitioner was ordered to be enlarged on interim bail in the event of her arrest in case FIR No.3 of 2017, dated 22.7.2017 under Sections 420, 409, 120-B of Penal Code and Sec. 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, registered at Police Station, SV & ACB Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, Inspector Yog Raj, has come present in Court alongwith the record. Mr. Sanjeev Sood, learned Additional Advocate General, has also placed on record status report prepared on the basis of the investigation carried out by the Investigating Agency. Record perused and returned.

(2.) Close scrutiny of the record/status report, reveals that on 22.7.2017,enquiry report of complaint No.99/2015 came to be received in police Station through Constable Akash Deepak No. 469 with the recommendation to register FIR. Report, as referred hereinabove, came to be received vide vigilance headquarter endst. No. SV & ACB (CR-VHQ) Comp. 99/15 (HMR)-14426 dated 13.7.2017 and o/o SP, SV 7 ACB(C/R) Mandi endst. No.6509, dated 20.7.2017. Subsequently, vide order dated 1.7.2017 Government accorded necessary permission to prosecute the person named in the FIR including the bail petitioner. Complainant Om Prakash alleged that bail petitioner, who is a Junior Engineer, IPH Sec. Lambloo under IPH Division and Sub Division, Hamirpur, misutilized the government funds during execution of maintenance/ wiring work through contractors in the pump house of LWSS Bharin-Bhalera. Record reveals that during the course of inquiry, 3 members of technical committee, randomly assessed selected five works and found that a sum of Rs. 78,592.00 in total, has been mis-utilized. Since, bail petitioner failed to check the works in question after regular intervals, Government suffered loss to the exchequer, as has been referred hereinabove.

(3.) Mr. Sanjeev Sood, learned Additional Advocate General, on the instructions of Investigating Officer, who is present in Court, fairly states that pursuant to order dated 28.5.2019, bail petitioner has joined the investigation and she is fully co-operating with the investigating agency. He further states that investigation in the case is complete and nothing is required to be recovered from the bail petitioner, however Mr. Sood, states that in case this Court intends to release the bail petitioner on bail, she may be directed to make herself available for investigation as well as trial as and when called by the Investigating Agency.