The State has the power to investigate cognizable offenses pertaining to the scheme, and the role of an Executive Assistant does not absolve them of responsibility if fraudulent activities are committed by the Panchayat or the Pradhan.

JUDGMENT

Jay Sengupta, J. - This is an application for the quashing of an investigational proceeding under Sections 406, 409, 420 and 506 read with Section 120B of the Penal Code.

2. Pursuant to an earlier direction given by this Court, a notice was served upon the de facto complainant/Block Development Officer. Although he is not separately represented, his cause may be very well taken up by the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

3. It appears that the First Information Report was lodged on 16.01.2018 alleging that huge sums of public money meant for the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme under one Samsi Gram Panchayat were defalcated. Little or no work was done in several projects although payments were made as per false reports. The petitioner being an Executive Assistant of the said Gram Panchayat was also responsible for commission of the alleged offences. An extract of the preliminary inquiry report was annexed with the First Information Report.

4. Mr. Rajdeep Majumder, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted as follows. The petitioner was only an Executive Assistant of the Panchayat Pradhan and was only to execute work as per his instruction. The petition was only to sign as per Rule 55 (2) of the Gram Panchayat Rules. Section 199 of the Panchayat Act provided that the officers of a Panchayat were public servants. Yet, no preliminary inquiry was done in this case. Reliance was placed on@START_TAG Sirajuddin s Case,1970 AIR SC 595 and on Lalita Kumari s Case, (2014) 2 SCC 1 . Moreover, there was an operational guideline framed for the Scheme in question, which provided that the Central Government might act in case of any fraud or misconduct concerning the scheme. As such, the State Government could not have taken any step in this regard.

5. Mr. Sudip Ghosh, learned counsel appearing for the State, submitted as follows. The Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee Act itself provided for the mechanism for a preliminary inquiry at schedule I of the Act. Section 28 contained an overriding effect. In the instant case, the First Information Report clearly stated about a preliminary inquiry conducted by the department in terms of the Special Act. A prima facie case was clearly made out against the petitioner. The statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Code would clearly show the role played by the petitioner. Since the investigation was stayed a few months after the registration of the First Information Report, the exact quantification of the total loss incurred could not be assessed and a charge-sheet could not be submitted. In some projects, no work was found to have been done as per physical verification although some work was shown on paper. Nearly all payments were made in some of the projects.

6. I heard the submissions on the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the State and perused the revision petition, the connected application and the case diary.

7. First, it appears that a preliminary inquiry was done before a First Information Report was registered in this case as is reflected from the First Information Report itself. Therefore, the question of there being no preliminary inquiry does not arise.

8. A careful reading of the operational guidelines to the Scheme in question makes it clear that there is a provision contained therein enabling the Central Government to take steps in the event of any violation of the Scheme. However, this does not take away the powers of the State Government or for that matter, the Investigating Agency of the State, to investigate into cognisable offences pertaining to the Scheme.

9. On the other hand, it appears that the norms provided for preliminary inquiry as contained in schedule I of the said Act, were substantially complied with.

10. Now, as regards the role of an Executive Assistant of a Gram Panchayat, Section 55 of the West Bengal Gram Panchayat Administration Rules, 2004, in