Recently, the Calcutta High Court dismissed the criminal charges against the petitioner accused of diverting funds allocated for the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana, a rural housing initiative by the Union government. Since 2018, the petitioner has been employed as a Village Level Entrepreneur (VLE) at the Baraturigram Gram Panchayat, within the Mayureshwar-I Development Block, operating under the auspices of the Panchayat Samity Office.

Without the petitioner's knowledge, in 2021, the Block Development Officer (BDO) lodged a complaint concerning fund transfer discrepancies directed at both Naba Kumar Let, a Gram Panchayat member, and the present petitioner. This complaint was initiated based on an inquiry report provided by the Gram Panchayat's Pradhan.

On these grounds, the petitioner faced charges under Sections 420, 406, and 409 for alleged offenses related to cheating and criminal breach of trust.

In quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, a single bench of Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta noted:

This Court finds the case initiated against him is purely on the basis of suspicion as appears in the FIR as well as in the charge-sheet. Case alleging cognizable offences without specific allegation or disclosing materials against the petitioner cannot be continued. There must be direct allegation and/or material or involvement in the alleged offence but that is entirely missing. Allegation against him is only on the basis of doubt or suspicion.

The procedure under the Awas Yojana, a rural housing initiative, involved applicants submitting their requests to the Block Development Officer ("BDO") for verification. Subsequently, the District Magistrate would conduct a separate verification process and allocate funds, which were then distributed to the beneficiaries by the BDO.

The petitioner's representative highlighted that upon receiving the initial amount of Rs 60,000, the beneficiaries initiated construction and subsequently applied for the second installment of Rs 50,000. Allegedly, this second sum was diverted or misused by Naba Kumar Let, a Gram Panchayat member, who transferred the funds to the accounts of his relatives. The petitioner asserted that Let confessed to this act upon being confronted by authorities. He reportedly admitted his wrongdoing to the pradhan and reimbursed a total of Rs 4,40,000, committing to settle the remaining Rs 20,000 within a week.

The petitioner contended that despite these circumstances, Naba Kumar Let remained unapprehended by the authorities. They emphasized that the petitioner's innocence prevailed throughout the case as their involvement solely pertained to capturing photographs of the houses and not managing the fund transfer. The argument put forth was that the petitioner's inclusion in the FIR was merely speculative, lacking any substantial evidence, and aimed at causing harassment.

On the Contrary, the State's counsel referred to the case diary, affirming that the FIR was lodged due to suspicions surrounding the petitioner's potential involvement in the fund diversion. They maintained that based on this suspicion, charges were framed and subsequently taken into account by the trial court, thereby dismissing the plea for quashing.

After hearing both sides, the Court examined the FIR, charge sheet, and case diary, noting that while the petitioner was deemed suspicious, there existed no direct implication or evidence linking them to the actual diversion of funds.

The Court noted that the petitioner's role solely involved documenting the progress of house construction by capturing photos of incomplete structures. These images were then cataloged in a centralized software system, serving the purpose of verifying whether the allocated funds were being appropriately utilized.

Court further observed that the co-accused, Naba Kumar Let had voluntarily come forward and admitted his guilt, by returning the money and thus there was not any specific allegation against the present petitioner for misappropriation of funds or breach of trust or siphoning of the fund as alleged by the Block Development Officer.

The Court, upon recognizing that the proceedings against the petitioner lacked specific allegations or substantial evidence but were primarily initiated based on suspicion, decided to quash these proceedings.

Case: Tarun Kumar Pal Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr.