Allahabad High Court
Dr. Swati Shukla vs State Of U.P. on 11 May, 2023
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:101676
Court No. - 82
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13598 of 2022
Applicant :- Dr. Swati Shukla
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Gaurav Kakkar,Manish Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sandeep Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gaurav Kakkar, Advocate assisted by Sri Manish Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
Facts in brief are that as per allegation in the F.I.R. the applicant is niece of the informant. Co-accused Umesh Shukla is father of the present applicant. There was locker in the name of grandfather of the present applicant, namely Hriday Narayan Shukla in the Main Branch Kenara Bank, Katra, Mirzapur. The grandfather of the applicant wrote a letter to the bank on 26.06.2020 with instruction that locker be opened in presence of his four sons and the key of the locker which was lost be given to his sons and this letter was received in the bank even though the present applicant and her father Umesh Shukla went to the bank and got the locker opened on 23.9.2020 by making false signature of Hriday Narayan Shukla which was witnessed by present applicant and took away the property kept in the locker. On 15.05.2021 Hriday Narayan Shukla died. When information about his death was given to the bank by the informant, its operation was stopped and the fact that the locker was opened on 23.09.2020 came into the knowledge of the informant and present F.I.R. was lodged. In this way, the present applicant and co-accused Umesh Shukla fraudulently grabbed the amount kept in the locker owned by her grandfather by making his false signature and the applicant witnessing the same as genuine.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that she is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She granted anticipatory bail by this Court during investigation and now after investigation charge sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer before the learned court. She was not named in the F.I.R. but her name was brought into light during investigation. Further submitted that the locker was opened by Hriday Narayan Shukla himself in presence of present applicant. He made his own signature on the lock-book on 23.09.2020 and operated himself. The key of the locker was given on 06.07.2020 to Hriday Narayan Shukla who made his signature on the lock-book which was witnessed by present applicant on the lock-book. In this way, it cannot be said that the holder of the locker was not present in the bank at the time of operating the locker. Further submitted that an inquiry was conducted by the Bank Authorities and it was found that locker was opened by the holder himself and no any forgery was committed while opening the locker. Chandralok was posted as Assisted Manager in the Bank at the time of alleged incident, he made statement that Hriday Narayan Shukla was sitting in the car and in the bank locker was opened in presence of present applicant and she made her signature on the register after talking something to her father Umesh Shukla and she went into the bank to open the locker. He could not know as to who made the signature of Hriday Narayan Shukla because he was sitting in the car outside the bank. In this way, it cannot be said that Hriday Narayan Shukla was not present at the time of operating the locker on the day on which it was opened. Further submitted that there was typographical error in the order of bail regarding which she moved correction application which is still pending. It is also submitted that now she is ready to face the trial. There is apprehension of arrest against the applicant, so request for anticipatory bail during pendency of trial.
In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Bharat Chaudhary and another Vs. State of Bihar and anotehr (2003) 8 SCC 77, Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98, Satender Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another LL 2021 SC 550 and by this Court in the case of Monika Agarwal Vs. State of U.P. Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3523 of 2022 decided on 25.5.2022.
On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite party as well as learned AGA opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail and urged that the main role was played by the present applicant who went with her father in the bank and her father made signature on the place of Hriday Narayan Shukla and she witnessed it as genuine signature of Hriday Narayan Shukla though he was not present there and no any signature was made by him. The signature of Hriday Narayan Shukla, that was made on his application moved by him to the bank on 26.06.2020 for opening the locker before his all sons was found tallied but the signature made on log-book on 23.09.2020 at the time of operating the locker was not tallied with original signature of Hriday Narayan Shukla, this shows that Hriday Narayan Shukla was not present in the bank at the time of opening of the locker and these signatures were made by father of the applicant and it was identified by her as genuine. In this way, it cannot be said that she is innocent and has committed no offence. Further urged that as per statements of Ravi Kant, an employee of the bank, Chandralok and Senior Manager Prem Prakash on 23.09.2020, Umesh Shukla and the present applicant came in the bank but Hriday Narayan Shukla did not come into the bank. The present applicant went into the bank to open the locker after making her signature in the log-book. The Senior Manager, Prem Prakash also stated during investigation that the log-book dated 23.09.2020 related to locker no. 39 was bearing the signature of Hriday Narayan Shukla and present applicant and on 26.06.2020 the information for loss of key was also given by the locker holder and on 16.07.2020 new key was provided to Hriday Narayan Shukla in presence of Ajay Shukla, Manoj Shukla, Chandralok and S.N. Prasad and everything was safe in the locker. In this way on the date of alleged incident i.e. on 23.09.2020 the locker was not opened by Hriday Narayan Shukla but by the present applicant and her father. F.S.L. report also falsifies the signature of Hriday Narayan Shuka as made on log-book.
It is next urged that during investigation anticipatory bail was moved on behalf of the applicant and was obtained on the part of present applicant on parity basis that co-accused S.N. Prasad was already on anticipatory bail granted by coordinate Bench of this Court dated 25.2.2022 in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 15 of 2022 that was obtained by misleading the fact of anticipatory bail of co-accused S.N. Prasad which was rejected by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.2.2022. In this way, the applicant misled the Court and even the order was not got corrected till now. She enjoyed the liberty granted by this Court during investigation which was obtained by misleading the real fact of bail related to co-accused S.N. Prasad. In this way, the role of the applicant cannot be said to show her bonafide even before this Court.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, perusal of record, material collected during investigation, F.S.L. report and the fact of misleading the Court in obtaining anticipatory bail during investigation on the basis of parity though no any anticipatory bail was granted by this Court in favour of any co-accused, there appears no ground to grant anticipatory bail in favour of this applicant. The anticipatory bail application of applicant Dr. Swati Shukla involved in Case Crime No. 117 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 469, 471, 120-B IPC, P.S. Katra, District Mirzapur is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 11.5.2023
A. Singh
