(1.) By invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, entire criminal proceedings of four cases, R.C. Case No. 64(A)/1996, R.C. Case No. 47(A)/1996, R.C. Case No. 68(A)/1996 and R.C. Case No. 38(A)/ 1996, have been sought to be quashed on the ground that the prosecution in these cases would be barred by Section 300 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as the petitioner has already been convicted for the same offence in R.C. Case No. 20(A)/1996.
(2.) The facts leading to the filing of this case are that in the year 1996, when it was detected that the Officials and Staff of Animal Husbandry Department in connivance with other accused persons including high ups in the administration, have been facilitating withdrawal of money from different Treasuries of the erstwhile State of Bihar fraudulently putting the State exchequer to a great loss, 64 cases known as Fodder Scam Cases were instituted at different places of the State of Bihar. After bifurcation of the State, most of the cases including the aforesaid four cases were transferred to the State of Jharkhand. The aforesaid four cases and also R.C. Case No. 20(A)/1996, relating to fraudulent withdrawal from Chaibasa, Deoghar, Doranda and Dumka Treasuries, have been registered under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477, 477A, 201, 511 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The period for which the aforesaid four cases and also R.C. Case No. 20(A)/1996, were registered is being shown herein below:-
(3.) All the aforesaid cases were lodged on the allegation that the accused persons-officials and staff of the the Department of Anumal Husbandry, Bihar, in connivance with the suppliers did illegal acts and created forged allotment letters, false supply orders and the bills, upon which false certificate of receiving the materials were given, on the basis of which false contingent bills were submitted and to justify fraudulent purchase, the falsification of the documents were made and on the basis of which huge money was withdrawn from different Treasuries, which was beyond allocation of the fund, knowledge of which was there to high officials but they did not do anything purposely to facilitate the other co-accused to withdraw the money fraudulently and not only that they did such acts to protect them so that they may not be prosecuted.