Laxman Singh Maida vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Heard.

This is the First bail petition under section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking bail in connection with Crime No.197/2018 registered at Police Station Alot,

District Ratlam, for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC.

As per information given by the accused, no other bail application is either filed or pending or has been decided by any co-ordinate Bench of this

Court or by Hon'ble the Apex Court in connection with the present crime number.

Brief facts relevant to the case are that the petitioner was Principal of Government Multipurpose Higher Secondary School, Alot and Incharge

Block Education Officer at the time of the incident. For the financial year 2016-2017 the budget was allotted in different heads for purchasing

furnitures, books, magazines, sanitary wares and stationery items for 20 educational institutes situated within Alot block, District Ratlam. As per

M.P. Store Purchase Rules, (for brevity 'The Rules'), for purchasing these articles, invitation of quotations were required and after receiving the

articles from the qualified bidder, verification of the purchased articles was also necessary for the satisfaction that the articles supplied by the

qualified bidder are according to the quality and quantity of the purchase order. Thereafter the bills of the supplied items will have to be produced in

the treasury. However, the petitioner in gross violation of 'The Rules' made disbursement of Rs.90,31,514/- to Kendriya Sahakari Thok Upbhokta

Bhandar Maryadit, Indore without even getting the delivery of items said to have been purchased. It is further alleged that despite not having power

to draw the amount of Rs.90,31,514/- he prepared and passed bills and vouchers with regard to purchase and made payment of the aforesaid

amount.

It is also alleged that the petitioner neither informed the Principal of the schools regarding sanction of amount for purchase of furnitures, books,

magazines, sanitary wares and stationery items, therefore, the Principal of the schools could not invite meeting of SMDC of Schools for purchase of

the aforesaid articles. When the matter came to the knowledge of the District Education Officer, who had conducted enquiry and filed a written

complaint dated 30/03/2017 against the petitioner at Police Station Alot. On the basis of this complaint, F.I.R bearing crime No.197/2017, registered

at Police Station-Alot, District- Ratlam against the petitioner for offence under Sections 420,467,468,471,459 of IPC and investigation was initiated

against the petitioner. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the applicant that the amount of Rs.90,31,514/-was sanctioned on 15th and 16th of March,

2017 and the same has to be expended till 31/03/2017. The petitioner after getting the allotment has conducted meeting with the Principals of the

concerned schools and according to their requirements, prepared a list of the articles, which are to be purchased and issued the supply order to the

Kendriya Sahakari Thok Upbhokta Bhandar Maryadit, Indore by following 'The Rules'. It is further submitted that looking to the short span of time,

the Manager, Kendriya Sahakari Thok Upbhokta Bhandar Maryadit, Indore had given an undertaking to supply the articles within a period of 15

days and upon the petitioner being satisfied that the purchased articles are according to the order and upto the quality, then the amount of

Rs.90,31,514/- will be transferred to the account of the aforesaid institution.

Counsel further submitted that when the petitioner came to know that certain rules and regulations with regard to purchase of aforesaid articles

have not been complied with, then vide communication dated 31/03/2017, he cancelled the purchase order and asked the concerned vendor to

deposit the amount of Rs.90,31,514/- with the treasury and the same has been deposited on 03/04/2017. Communication regarding the above

transaction was sent to the District Education Officer, Ratlam, therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner has committed embezzlement of the

Government money. It is further submitted that the petitioner with utmost good faith purchased the articles, therefore he has not committed any

cheating or forgery.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer submitting that there are ample evidence on record to implead the present petitioner

with the present crime.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Perusal of the document shows that the budget was allotted on 16.03.2017 and it has to be consumed before

03.2017. It is the contention of the petitioner that he called a meeting with the Principals and other concerned of the school falling under his

jurisdiction and prepared a list of required articles and placed order with Kendriya Sahakari Thock Upbhokta Bhandar Maryadit, Indore. With the

purpose to use the budget allotted by the government, he placed order on 23.03.2017. A ban was imposed on purchasing by the Government vide

letter dated 23.05.2017. The delivery of article was to be made within 15 days of placing of the order. The payment was made in advance in

anticipation of delivery on a later period looking to the closing of financial year. Later when the complaint was made he cancelled the order and

asked the supplier to refund the money. The money was refunded. The transaction was made by the government department to an authorized

supplier which was later refunded.

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case along with the nature of allegations and the circumstances in which it is

alleged to be committed and refund of money, status of supplier, application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner be released on bail upon his

furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the

concerned CJM/Trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court subject to the following conditions :-

(I)The petitioner shall cooperate with the trial and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments on frivolous grounds to protract the trial. (II)The

petitioner shall not directly or indirectly allure or make any inducement, threat or promise to the prosecution witnesses so as to dissuade them from

disclosing truth before the Court.

(III)The petitioner shall not commit any offence or involve in any criminal activities

(IV)In case of his involvement in any other criminal activity or breach of any other aforesaid conditions, the bail granted in this case may also be

cancelled.