Allahabad High Court
Smt Shashi Yadav vs State Of U.P. 2 Others on 30 October, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:207311
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11572 of 2023
Applicant :- Smt Shashi Yadav
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Babu Lal Ram
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA and perused the material available on record.
2. Present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 632 of 2018, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, P.S. Civil Lines, District Moradabad, during the pendency of trial.
3. Allegation against the applicant is that she along with other co accused persons are said to have embezelled the government money.
4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is lady and is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the allegations levelled in the FIR are absolutely false, frivolous and bogus. There is no evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged crime. The applicant is under apprehension of imminent arrest. In case the applicant is released on bail, she would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the trial. It is further submitted that applicant is simply a house wife and she has no role in the present case and the applicant has no power to sanction bill nor she is beneficiary and she has not get single penny which was transferred by co accused in the account of the applicant.
5. On the other hand, Learned AGA appearing for the State submitted that there is allegation of embezzlement of public money by the applicant and other co accused persons, and the mater is very serious, therefore, no case for anticipatory bail is made out.
6. Number of arguments were advanced by learned counsel for the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the accusation against the applicant by the informant. It is further submitted that on the material collected during investigation no offence is made out against the applicant, therefore, prays that in case the applicant approaches the court below and applies for bail, the court below be directed to consider the bail application in the light of the judgement passed by Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of material brought on record as well as complicity of accused, I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.
8. Accordingly, this application has no force and is accordingly dismissed. Since applicant is ladey, she is directed to surrender before Trial Court and to move an application for bail. In case such an application is filed by applicant, Trial Court is directed to decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law, considering the judgment passed by Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773.
Order Date :- 30.10.2023
RavindraKSingh
