Allahabad High Court
Smt Neelam vs State Of U.P. on 17 June, 2021
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11345 of 2021 Applicant :- Smt Neelam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kailash Prasad Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
1. Heard Sri K.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant-Smt. Neelam and Sri Vikas Goswami, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This application seeking anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved of the order dated 21.01.2021 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mathura in Anticipatory Bail Application No.152 of 2021, thereby rejecting the application seeking anticipatory bail arising out of Case Crime No.870 of 2018 at Police Station-Nauhjheel, District-Mathura, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC.
3. Allegation on the applicant is that she is a beneficiary of forged documents on basis of which she had procured employment as an Assistant Teacher, whereas according to the applicant neither her documents are forged nor there is any manipulation.
4. Allegation on the applicant is that though she was not entitled to get appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher but the applicant-Neelam wife of Rajan Singh had approached the In-charge Head Master of Purva Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Shankargarhi, Vikas Khand, Nauhjheel, District- Mathura seeking appointment on the strength of order No.2064-74/2015-16 dated 14.01.2016, in which there is mention of Government Order. She approached the said In-charge Headmaster on 18.12.2017 enclosing along with order dated 14.01.2016, letter of Secretary, Uttar Pradesh Basic Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad bearing No.192-284/2017-18 dated 07.12.2017 and order of District Basic Education Officer, Mathura dated 21.09.2015. She informed the Head Master that she has been appointed as a Assistant Teacher in Science/Math subject and, therefore, she be allowed to take charge. It is mentioned in the FIR that since the appointment order was of the year 2015-16, therefore, she was refused joining but as per oral instructions of Block Education Officer, Nauhjheel, joining was given to the applicant and its report was forwarded to the Block Education Officer, Nauhjheel. After enquiry, it was found that applicant-Neelam was never appointed, as such and she forged documents to obtain her appointment as a result of which, FIR was lodged against the applicant on 13.10.2018.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, it is evident that prima facie applicant is a beneficiary of forged documents. It is a matter of investigation as to whether, who all are involved in creating forged appointment order and who all are party to the offence, committed by certain influential accused persons, which may include officials of the Basic Education Parishad. In view of said facts, it is necessary that applicant surrenders before the Authorities and cooperate with the Investigating Officer, inasmuch as, the chain of beneficiary, middleman and mastermind is long and unless and until, they are all subjected to investigation for which sometimes custodial investigation may also be necessary to reach the roots of the crime, which is paralyzing the fabric of the society and also attacking on the roots of the education system, may not be exposed.
6. In view of such facts, in the present case, I am of the opinion that for the present, applicant has failed to make out a case for grant of anticipatory bail, thus, application fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.6.2021/Ashutosh