Mohini Shakyawar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 9071 MP

                             1
                 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                             Cr.A.No.7909/2021
           (Mohini Shakyawar Vs. The State of M.P. & Others)

Gwalior Bench : Dated : 21.12.2021

         Shri Ravindra Dixit, counsel for the applicant.

         Shri Rajesh Shukla, learned Deputy Advocate General for the

State.

         The present appeal has been filed under Section 14 (A) of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act,

1989 (for brevity 'the Act') against the order dated 14.12.2021 passed by

the Special Judge (Atrocities), Gwalior whereby the application of the

appellant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail has

been rejected.

         Appellant apprehends her arrest in connection with offences

punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 469, 471, 198, 120-B, 409 of

IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of the Act registered as Crime No.721/2018 at

Police Station Morar, District Gwalior (M.P.).

         It is submission of learned counsel that the applicant, who is a

lady aged 36 years, is apprehending her arrest on the basis of

registration of offences referred above. She is working in Union Bank

of India on the post of Single Window Operator (Clerk) from the date of

appointment. At the relevant point of time, the applicant was Clerk,

wherein some students of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes

Category opened their banks accounts to get benefit of scholarship

which are given by the State Government. The said amount apparently
                            2
              HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           Cr.A.No.7909/2021
        (Mohini Shakyawar Vs. The State of M.P. & Others)

in connivance with the Institute and Education Institute BIPS College,

Khureri, Morar, Gwalior has been siphoned of and allegation against the

present applicant is of cooperation in opening the accounts and getting

the benefits. It is the submission of learned counsel that she is not

beneficiary of the transaction and no amount has been received by her

from any of the co-accused or any students of SC/ST Community. It is

further submitted that allegation of opening of accounts of different

beneficiaries of scholarship is far from truth. Since no allegation prima

facie of Atrocities Act is apparently available against the applicant,

therefore, bar of Section 18/18-A of the Atrocities Act does not come in

any manner. He relied upon the order of this Court in the matter of

Atendra Singh Rawat Vs. State of M.P., 2019 (2) MPLJ (Cri) 481.

She undertakes to cooperate in investigation/trial and she would not be

the source of harassment and embarrassment the complainant parties in

any manner. Thus, prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

      On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General for the

respondent/State opposed the prayer on the ground that at the relevant

point of time, she was a Clerk in the bank and she did not cooperate in

the investigation. Therefore, he prayed for rejection of the application.

Heard learned counsel for the State and perused the documents

appended thereto.

Considering the submissions and the fact that no ingredients of

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.No.7909/2021 (Mohini Shakyawar Vs. The State of M.P. & Others)

offence prima facie (bail purpose) is made out in respect of the

Atrocities Act and looking to the judgment of Atendra Singh Rawat

(supra), this Court is inclined to allow the application under Section

438 of Cr.P.C. It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the

applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of

Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of

the like amount to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer /

Investigating Agency.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the

following conditions by the applicant :-

1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by her;

2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3. The applicant will not indulge herself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused;

5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be;

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A.No.7909/2021 (Mohini Shakyawar Vs. The State of M.P. & Others)

7. Applicant shall mark her presence before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

Application stands allowed and disposed of.

Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for

compliance, if possible from the office of this Court.

Certified copy as per rules.

                                                       (Anand Pathak)
Rashid                                                     Judge

     RASHID KHAN
     2021.12.22
     12:01:50
     +05'30'