Geeta Rani v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44139 of 2023 Applicant :- Geeta Rani Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anil Kumar Misrha, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 347 of 2023, under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 216 of I.P.C., Police Station-Quarsi, District-Aligarh, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution story, the FIR was instituted against the Branch Manager, Amarjeet and one Saurabh Gupta for illegally transferring an amount of Rs. 4,90,000/- from the account of mother-in-law of the informant to that of one Sindhiya Sindhi and the said amount is stated to have been received by Saurabh Gupta in the form of cash.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has nothing to do with the said offence and she is not named in the FIR. She is a lady and employed as a clearing clerk in the bank. The offence committed, if any, may be by Branch Manager only. The applicant has no previous criminal history. As such, five cases have been foisted upon her at the time of arrest in the present matter. The applicant has been enlarged on bail in one case which has been annexed as Annexure No. 21. In support of his submission, learned counsel has placed much reliance upon the judgement of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and Another, 2020 (11) SCC 648, the Apex Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused may itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since

04.07.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶6Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶8Let the applicant-Geeta Rani involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. iv. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. v. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶9In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶10Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶11It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 28.10.2023 Mohini (Krishan Pahal, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad