Elected Mukhiya cannot be held criminally liable for diesel subsidy irregularities where Gram Sabha and Panchayat Secretary hold statutory authority.

The petitioner, who was the elected Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj, Mangraon, was named as an accused in Kachhawan P.S. Case No. 02 of 2014

The case was initiated based on a written application by the Block Development Officer (BDO), alleging irregularities in the distribution of diesel subsidies to farmers

The petitioner challenged the cognizance order dated 05.05.2017 passed by the A.C.J.M., Bikramganj, under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., asserting that the responsibility for subsidy distribution rested solely with the Panchayat Secretary and the Gram Sabha per government notifications

1. Whether a criminal case for financial irregularity is maintainable against a Mukhiya when statutory notifications vest the authority for fund disbursement in other officials

2. Whether the continuation of the criminal proceeding against the petitioner constitutes an abuse of the process of law warranting quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Notification No. 4442 (dated 26.07.2010), Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, which prescribes that eligibility for subsidies is decided by the Gram Sabha and payments are executed by the Panchayat Secretary

State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992), specifically Categories 1 and 7, which permit the quashing of FIRs/proceedings where allegations, even if taken at face value, do not constitute an offence or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive

Section 2(m) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006, regarding the statutory nature of the Gram Sabha

The court examined the Agriculture Department’s notification and observed that the Gram Sabha is the statutory body responsible for verifying farmer eligibility and approving the final list

Crucially, the notification mandates that the Panchayat Secretary, not the Mukhiya, is the authority responsible for releasing the funds and verifying cash memos

The court found that the petitioner, as an elected Mukhiya, had no legal role or obligation in the distribution of diesel subsidies or the decision-making process regarding eligibility

Consequently, the allegations failed to prima facie establish a criminal liability against the petitioner, and the court inferred that the case was likely motivated by local political differences

Applying the "golden principles" of the Bhajan Lal case, the court quashed the cognizance order dated 05.05.2017 passed by the learned A.C.J.M., Bikramganj, to prevent the abuse of the process of law