Raksha Kumari v. State of U.P

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12036 of 2023 Applicant :- Raksha Kumari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Parvez Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

¶2This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant-Raksha Kumari in connection with Case Crime No. 0008 of 2020, under sections 420, 406, 120-B, 504, 506 IPC & Section 66 (C) of Information & Technology Act 2008, P.S. Cyber Crime, District Agra.

¶3It is alleged in the F.I.R. that in connection with the marriage proposal, money was sent several times to a marriage matrimonial site company wherein the present applicant is an employee but the matrimonial site did not perform properly and the money has been grabbed by the present applicant. F.I.R. was lodged on 01.11.2020 and investigation started, which has been culminated into charge sheet.

¶4It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and she has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. It is further submitted that the applicant is a receptionist, who was working in the matrimonial site, namely, The India Matrimony. It is further submitted that the applicant being an employee only, complied with the direction of the officer of the company and as a matter of fact, no money was transferred or deposited in the bank account of the present applicant and as such, she has not made any wrongful gain. It is also submitted that the applicant has been cooperative during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that after submission of charge sheet, she is entitled for anticipatory bail. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and it has been vehemently argued that since the present applicant is an employee in the matrimonial site and she is engaged in the business work of her company, she is also liable for the crime committed by the company.

¶6In the present case, charge sheet has been submitted in this matter and the applicant is not the owner or director of the company and she is a simple employee in the matrimonial site company. After submission of charge sheet, now no custodial interrogation is required from the present accused applicant and she has been cooperative during the course of investigation.

¶7Although the charge sheet has been submitted in this matter, but in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial. It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial. It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶8Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶9The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶10In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/-with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

(i) 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected.

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if she has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶11In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 2.11.2023 Shivangi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad