JAGDISH PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Jagdish Prasad Singh has prayed for quashing of entire proceeding arising out of K. Hat P.S. Case No. 457 of 1997, instituted under Section 406/34 of the IPC. Shorn of unnecessary details, K. Hat P.S. Case No. 457 of 1997 under Sections 406/34 been out on the basis of the written report submitted by Ramji Sinha, Electrical Executive Engineer on the allegation that there has been theft/criminal breach of trust of copper coils from the Store of Meter Relay Testing Division (I) in between 28.5.1992 to 15.7.1997, the period during which Jagdish Prasad Singh was the Incharge being Assistant Engineer, Bihar State Electricity Board to the tune of Rs. 1,26,105/- approximately.

(2.) Contention on behalf of the petitioner is that the Executive Engineer himself happens to be defaulter and to save his skin, has filed instant case. It has further been submitted that, that happens to be the reason behind that since 1997, the investigation is in progress but the investigating authority failed to submit police report and that shows that actually uptil now, no definite material has been collected which could justify complicity of petitioner as an accused. Also submitted that petitioner who now has retired, faced severe trauma on account of pendency of the case as well as now he has been continuously deprived of monetary benefit, which the petitioner is entitled for on account of his retirement/superannuation. Then submitted that admittedly during the relevant period petitioner was Incharge of Store No. 1. Also submitted that for the purpose of crystallizing allegation against the petitioner, the informant was under obligation to produce stock register, receiving register, issuing register, gate pass so that any unscrupulous activity as alleged, at the hands of petitioner could be tested and verified. It has further been submitted that now the prosecution is barred under Section 468 of the Cr.P.C.

(3.) Surprisingly, with ulterior motive the prosecution has to its best knowledge, withhold those documents as such, the prayer of the petitioner appears to be bona fide. Consequent thereupon, the instant petition is fit to be allowed.