Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Princess Mahi @ Saher Naqvi vs State Of U.P. on 20 November, 2023
Bench: Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta
1
ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.5 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).6320/2023
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18-04-2023
in CRMABA No.12954/2022 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Allahabad)
PRINCESS MAHI @ SAHER NAQVI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF U.P. & ANR. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.100680/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING
C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.100681/2023-EXEMPTION FROM
FILING O.T.)
Date : 20-11-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA
For Petitioner(s) Dr. Vinod Kumar Tewari, AOR
Mr. Pramod Tiwari, Adv.
Mr. Vivek Tiwari, Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Bhoopesh Pandey, Adv.
Ms. Archana Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Praveen Pathak, Adv.
Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep, Adv.
Mr. Sunil Prakash Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Awdesh Kumar Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Davinder Pal Kaur, Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Chandan Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Md.sadath Hussain, Adv.
Mr. Chand Qureshi, AOR
Digitally signed by
satish kumar yadav
Date: 2023.11.23
17:24:27 IST
Reason:
Mr. Sharan Thakur, A.A.G.
Mr. Adarsh Upadhyay, AOR
Mr. Siddharth Thakur, Adv.
2
Mr. Mustafa Sajad, Adv.
Ms. Keerti Jaya, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. In terms of the undertaking given on the previous dates, the petitioner, who is present in person along with her counsel, has brought a demand draft of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten lakhs) bearing No.019749, dated 16.11.2023, drawn in favour of the Registrar, Supreme Court of India.
2. In this third round of litigation, the petitioner has approached this Court for the grant of anticipatory bail in FIR bearing Case Crime No.930 of 2019, dated 25.10.2019, registered at Police Station Colonelganj, District Prayagraj, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 IPC. The FIR has been lodged on the complaint made by one Rajesh Kumar, alleging, inter alia, that the petitioner fraudulently obtained a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) from him on the assurance of securing a job for his wife. Additionally, the petitioner is accused of accepting the same amount from the complainant/respondent No.2 for the sale of a plot for which it was later discovered, that the title documents were allegedly forged.
3. The petitioner denied both the allegations and sought anticipatory bail. She took various factual pleas before the High Court in support of her prayer for pre-arrest bail, which is duly noticed by the High Court in para 7 of the impugned order. It is, however, not necessary for us to go into those factual issues, as the same are the subject matter of trial.
4. When this case came up for hearing on 19.05.2023, the petitioner, who was present in person, voluntarily undertook to deposit the amount of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs), in four installments, with the Registry of this Court without prejudice to the rights of the parties.
5. It is not in dispute that in terms of the said undertaking, the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees Fourty Lakhs), in installments, which the Registry of this 3 Court has deposited in FDRs in a nationalised bank. With the deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- more today, the petitioner has deposited the total amount of Rs.50,00,000/- as per her undertaking.
6. The complainant/respondent No.2 pleads for the release of the aforesaid amount. However, the petitioner strongly disputes his claim and seek adjudication of such claim by an appropriate Court.
7. It is fairly admitted that the petitioner joined the investigation, which is now complete, and the chargesheet has since been filed.
8. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from her, that a part of the FIR to the extent of the alleged receipt of money by the petitioner from the complainant for securing a job for the complainant’s wife has since been quashed.
9. Be that as it may, in light of the above noticed subsequent events, including the deposit of the amount by the petitioner with the Registry of this Court as also the fact that the investigation is already complete, the interim protection granted to the petitioner vide order dated 19.05.2023 is made absolute.
10. The Registry is directed to transfer the amount of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs), deposited by the petitioner, along with interest, if any, to the Court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate at Allahabad (Prayagraj), or any other court of competent jurisdiction, where the chargesheet pursuant to FIR bearing Case Crime No.930 of 2019, dated 25.10.2019, has been filed. The said amount shall be kept in an interest-earning Fixed Deposit Receipt, in any Nationalized Bank, which fetches a maximum rate of interest.
11. It goes without saying that the entitlement to seek disbursement of the said amount shall depend upon the outcome of the criminal/civil proceedings, if any, pending between the parties.
12. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
413. As a sequel thereto, the pending interlocutory applications also stand disposed of.
(SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)