Allahabad High Court
Radhika Singh vs State Of U.P. on 25 July, 2022
Author: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6109 of 2022 Applicant :- Radhika Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saumitra Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard Shri Vinay Saran, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Saumitra Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
This anticipatory bail application has been preferred by the applicant (Radhika Singh) apprehending her arrest in Case Crime No.0173 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Indirapuram, District-Ghaziabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.).
As per the F.I.R., it has been alleged that the present applicant was working in the Company of the informant's husband from 02.02.2018 to 28.11.2018, thereafter, the husband of the informant died due to Covid-19 and the informant was unable to maintain the accounts of the Company. It is further alleged that taking advantage of the inability to operate account of the informant, the applicant has forged the password of the paying application and got transferred an amount of Rs.1,00,45,850/- into her personal account.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that M/S IT Trends belongs only to the applicant and husband of the informant has no relation at all with the said firm. He has further submitted that the applicant has never worked in the said Company. In para-21 of the application, the applicant has indicated that the SHO/ Inquiry Officer concerned has preferred an application for freezing the Bank Account of the applicant, even the said account was not linked to the PayPal account in question.
As per learned Senior Advocate, the account has already been frozen. Therefore, he has submitted that since the account in question has already been frozen, then there may not be any apprehension of the Investigating Officer to the effect that the present applicant shall withdraw the amount. Further, the investigation is going on and the present applicant undertakes that she shall co-operate with the investigation. The present applicant is not having any criminal history of any kind whatsoever, therefore, her liberty may be protected till filing of the charge-sheet.
Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the present applicant but he could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that the investigation is going on and the undertaking of the applicant that she will co-operate with the investigation, and without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I find it appropriate that the liberty of the present applicant may be protected till filing of the charge-sheet, if any, in the light of the dictum of Apex Court rendered in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.
However, it is provided that till conclusion of the investigation, the account in question of the present applicant which has already been frozen, shall remain freezed.
Therefore, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant, namely, Radhika Singh, shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation made by a police officer as and when required;
2. that 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;
3. that the applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the court;
4. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
5. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
6. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;
7. that in case the charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with evidence during trial;
8. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
In view of the aforesaid terms, the instant anticipatory bail application is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 25.7.2022 [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Suresh