LAWS(PAT)-1999-3-71

RAGHUBANSH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On March 10, 1999
RAGHUBANSH KUMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who at the material time was a Junior Engineer in the Public Health Engineering Department and was posted at Deoghar is facing a prosecution before the Special Judge (Vigilance), South Bihar for alleged offence punishable under various sections of the Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1949. Another co-accused in the case was one Om Prakash Mishra who at the material time was posted as Assistant Engineer.

(2.) According to the proseuction case, 238 pieces of pipe lying in the Department's godown were misappropriated by the accused and were sold by them as scrap iron in the market. The sale-proceeds amounting to Rs.7,759/- was not deposited in the Government treasury. The aforesaid occurrence took place on 20-11-1980 and the FIR was lodged in 1988. The charge-sheet was submitted on 14-2-1996.

(3.) On submission of the charge-sheet, the petitioner and the other co-accused Om Prakash Mishra made an application for their discharge in terms of Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitions filed on behalf of the petitioner and the aforesaid Om Prakash Mishra were taken up together by the Special Judge who by order dated 15-9-1998 rejected their prayer holding that there were sufficient materials against the accused for proceeding with the trial. He accordingly fixed 28-10-1998 for framing of charges. Against that order Om Prakash Mishra came to this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 2443/ 1998 seeking quashing of that order as also the entire criminal prosecution arising out of Vigilance P. S. Cases No.0044/1980, dated 22-9-1980 and Special Case No. 66/1983. The aforesaid Criminal Misc. was allowed by order dated 18-12-1998, and a learned Single Judge of this Court was pleased to quash the prosecution, insofar as Om Prakash Mishra was concerned, on the ground of inordinate delay and the failure to conclude the trial speedily. In para 6 of that order, it was observed as follows :