Anjum Praveen vs The State Of Bihar & Anr.

Heard the parties.

The present quashing petition has been preferred to quash the order dated 06.07.2018 passed by learned ACJM-1, Jamui, whereby and where under cognizance was taken against petitioner in connection with Chandradeep P.S. Case No. 23/2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120(B), 467 and 468 of the IPC.

Present quashing petition is of year, 2019.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that Md. Jafar Imam, B.D.O., Aliganj, submitted a written complaint dated 17.02.2018 before the S.H.O., Chandradeep P.S., alleging that the Sarpanch of Satha Gram Kachahari had withdrawn a total amount of ₹1,41,800/- from the Gram Kachahari account bearing A/c No. 30767292941 maintained with SBI, Aliganj. The said amount was allegedly withdrawn under the sole signature/biometric authentication of Anjum Praveen, wife of Md. Irshad, through the Aadhaar-based biometric system. It was further alleged that the account of the Gram Kachahari was a Government account and, as per the prescribed procedure, withdrawal therefrom was required to be made under the joint signatures of the sarpanch and up-sarpanch. However, the amount in question was allegedly withdrawn through the single authentication of Anjum Praveen, which was alleged to be illegal and in violation of the Government rules.

After investigation, police submitted Charge-Sheet No. 47 of 2018 dated 18.05.2018 against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120(B), 467 and 468 of the IPC. Thereafter, the learned A.C.J.M.-I, Jamui, took cognizance of the aforesaid offences against the petitioner, and the case is presently pending before the said Court.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that infact no offence has been committed by the petitioner, who was the sarpanch of the panchayat and out of oblique and political motive she was implicated with the present transaction on behalf of up-sarpanch and other co-villagsers. It is submitted that withdrawal was made for buying furniture for panchayat and petitioner bona-fidely purchased furniture for Rs. 55,000/-. In support of same learned counsel relied upon annexure no. 3 of the present quashing petition. It is submitted that rest of the withdrawal amount out of Rs.1,41,800/- was with this petitioner, but as she was prevented to make any further purchase, particularly after lodging of present FIR, she decided to return the balance amount, details of which is as under:- Total of Rs. 1,60,000/- (Annexure-2 series) to the bank account bearing A/c no. 30767292941 of Gram Kachahari, from where the amount was withdrawn. In view of aforesaid nothing survives in this matter and continuing with the present proceeding would only amount to abuse the process of court of law.

Sr. No. Date of Payment Amount Deposited 1. 24.11.2017 Rs. 20,000/-2. 25.11.2017 Rs. 20,000/-3. 26.11.2017 Rs. 20,000/-4. 16.12.2017 Rs. 20,000/-5. 18.12.2017 Rs. 20,000/-6. 19.12.2017 Rs. 20,000/-7. 20.12.2017 Rs. 20,000/-8. 21.12.2017 Rs. 20,000/-Total Rs. 1,60,000/-

Learned APP could not disputed aforesaid factual submission and also annexure no(s). 2 series and 3 as submitted aforesaid by learned counsel for the petitioner.

Considering all such aspect, this Court is convinced enough as the amount which was withdrawn was used in part by the petitioner for official purpose, but when it was objected entire amount of Rs. 1,60,000/- was returned to the bank account of the Gram Kachahari, Atha as mentioned aforesaid, therefore, continuing with the present proceeding before learned trial court would only amount to abuse the process of court of law, accordingly impugned order of cognizance dated 06.07.2018 with all its consequential proceedings, qua, petitioner arising thereof as passed in Chandradeep P.S. Case No. 23/2018, pending before learned ACJM-1, Jamui is hereby quashed and set aside.

Hence, this application stands allowed.

TCR (Trial Court Records), if any, be returned to the learned Trial Court henceforth, alongwith the copy of this judgment.