D.K.SINHA, J. - (1.) THIS Cr. Revision is directed against the order impugned dated 6.3.2009 passed by Shri A.K. Dubey, Judicial Magistrate, Rajmahal in G.R. No. 407 of 1998 arising out of Barharwa P.S. Case No. 112 of 1998 by which the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner for her discharge for the alleged offence under Sections 420/ 120 -B/409, IPC was rejected.
(2.) THE prosecution story in short was that the District Superintendent of Education, Sehibganj had made a preliminary enquiry as to the allegation made by the villagers in respect of distribution of food to the students of Primary School, Barharwa and found that the accused Baidyanath Mahto, Head Master in Barharwa Primary School had obtained 9.06 quintals of wheat from the Block but distributed only 4.05 quintals of wheat on the basis of 80% attendance of students with the balance of 5.01 quintals of wheat which was retained by him. The informant alleged that without verifying the attendance of the students in the said school to the extent of 80% he obtained wheat for all the students assuming that they had fulfilled the required criteria of 80% attendance in the school for receiving nutritious food. The Stock Register maintained by Mahto depicted that he had lifted 4.05 quintals of wheat on 24.01.1997 for its distribution amongst the students though his attendance was not marked for a single day since 06.11.1996 up -to 4th October, 1997 in the school register. The informant alleged in the report that recommendation was made for 172 students in the month of June, 1996 for food whereas only 136 students had completed the required attendance in the school and wheat was shown to be distributed on 07.12.1996 and on 14.12.1996 to the students whereas, during such period, he was deputed in the Block Office and in that manner he committed irregularity in distribution of food and illegally retained stock of 5.01 quintals of wheat. On the basis of the enquiry report of the informant, FIR was lodged against the accused Baidyanath Mahto, Headmaster, Primary School, Barharwa (Sahibganj). But after investigation the Investigating Officer submitted charge -sheet against Baidyanath Mahto, Dhirendra Kumar Singh and the petitioner Sunanda Nandi @ Sunanda Devi for the alleged offence under Sections 420/ 120 -B/409, IPC. A petition was preferred by the petitioner Sunanda Nandi for her discharge which was refused by the S.D.J.M., Rajmahal in T.R.No. 465 of 2004 against which, she preferred Cr. Revision No. 286 of 2005 before this Court on the ground that her petition for discharge under Section 239 Code of Criminal Procedure was rejected without application of judicial mind and only on the ground that though the cognizance of the offence was taken against her but the same could not be challenged by her before any appropriate Court and that the Court held that there were sufficient materials on the record for framing of charge without specifying prima facie any of such materials. This Court after appreciating the merit of the Cr. Revision, set aside the impugned order dated 28.01.2005 with the direction to the S.D.J.M., Rajmahal to pass speaking order afresh on the petition of the petitioner filed under Section 239, Code of Criminal Procedure.
(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that pursuant to such observation the petition filed under Section 239, Code of Criminal Procedure was reconsidered by a detailed dated 06.03.2009 by the learned Judicial Magistrate who rejected the petition without there being any material at all against the petitioner Sunanda Nandi. The counsel pointed out that the learned Judicial Magistrate had simply mentioned that during distribution of wheat to the students for the quota of June, 1996 and July, 1996 on 7.12.1996 and 14.12.1996 respectively by the principal accused Baidyanath Mahto, the petitioner was the Ineharge Headmistress of the said school at the relevant time and it was the co -accused Dhirendra Kumar Singh who had deputed the accused Baidyanath Mahto in the office of Literacy Programme at Barharwa Prak - hand from where he was carrying out the business of distribution of food to the students of Barharwa Primary School. Learned Judicial Magistrate failed to refer single instance of the nexus of the petitioner Sunanda Nandi that she abetted the offence or she was directly involved in distribution of wheat to the students on the basis of their 80% attendance in school. Though during investigation, as would be evident from the case diary, that the Headmaster accused Mahto ought to have sent the list of only those students who were in attendance in the school up -to 80% in a particular month but list of all the students were sent by him for obtaining the quota of wheat ignoring the qualifying quota of 80% attendance of each student in the school. The Headmaster Shri Mahto requested the authority for either adjustment of the balance wheat or for necessary direction and pursuant to that the Block Development Extension Officer vide his letter No.24 dated 04.02.1997 directed Shri Mahto to deposit the balance 5.01 quintals of wheat in the godown of the Food Corporation of India but the Assistant Manager of the said Corporation refused to accept or receive any quantity of wheat without assigning reasons. However, the villagers expressed their anguish when wheat were distributed only to those students in the month of January, 1997 who had completed 80% attendance in the school and sent a complaint to the authority.;