[ad_1]
Allahabad High Court
Smt. Tayara Bano vs State Of U.P. on 10 June, 2025
Author: Dinesh Pathak
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:96156 Court No. - 44 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4415 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Tayara Bano Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar,Nitesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the record.
2. The instant Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 482 BNSS has been preferred by the applicant after rejecting his anticipatory bail application by the order dated 13.05.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (P.C. Act), Court No. 4, Varanasi, seeking Anticipatory Bail in Special Trial No. 740 of 2024 (State vs. Ram Lal and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 83 of 2022, under Sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Sections 7A/13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, Police Station Duddhi, District Sonbhadra.
3. Previously, Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 4969 of 2022 moved on behalf of the present applicant has been allowed and the anticipatory bail has been granted, vide order dated 7.5.2024, during the period of investigation. For ready reference, order dated 7.5.2024 is quoted herein below:-
“Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant after rejecting his anticipatory bail application by the order dated 27.04.2022 passed by Additional District and Session Judge/Special Judge (P.C. Act), Court No. 4, Varanasi, seeking Anticipatory Bail in Case Crime No. 83 of 2022, under Sections 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 409 IPC, Police Station Duddhi, District Sonbhadra.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that first information report of this case was lodged on 08.04.2022 against five accused persons, namely, Parthraj Singh, Ramlal, Tayara Bano, Kamta Prasad and Shripal with regard to embezzlement committed in purchase of cemented benches. So far as present applicant is concerned, it is submitted that she is village Pradhan of Village Sundari. In departmental enquiry, it was found that price of benches was worth Rs. 2,40,000/- but the applicant has paid Rs. 2,49,994/-, as such, excess payment of Rs. 9994/- was made by the applicant and accordingly, in exercise of power under Section 95(1)g of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, District Magistrate, Sonbhadra vide order dated 06.04.2022 directed the applicant to deposit 50% of said amount, i.e., Rs. 4997/- within a week and the said amount has been deposited by the applicant on 11.07.2022. The applicant has no criminal history to her credit. Pursuant to F.I.R. of this case, the applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest. Lastly, it is submitted that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she would not misuse the liberty and will co-operate with the investigation of this case.
Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. opposed the prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant by contending that as on date there is no material on record to presume the false implication of the applicant. Investigation of this case is going on. Considering the prosecution case, offence is made out against the applicant.
Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties as noted above, reasonable apprehension of arrest of the applicant, taking into consideration the gravity of offence, nature of accusation and there being no possibility of his fleeing from justice, this Court is of the view that prima facie the applicant has made out a case for granting anticipatory bail during investigation.
In the event of arrest of the applicant Tayara Bano involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. with the following conditions :-
i) The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer / investigating officer as and when required.
ii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
iii)The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
iv) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above or in case it is found that applicant has obtained this order concealing any material facts, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
It is clarified that observations made in this order at this stage is limited for the purpose of determination of this anticipatory bail application only and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The investigating officer of this case shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions according to law on the basis of materials / evidences on record.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, this anticipatory bail application is allowed”
4. An F.I.R., bearing Case Crime No. 0083 of 2022 dated 8.4.2022, has been lodged on behalf of the State authorities pointing out embezzlement in purchasing of the C.C. Benches. A proper inquiry was conducted by the joint inquiry committee for spot verification in pursuance of the order dated 2.4.2022 passed by Commissioner, Vindhyachal-Division, Mirzapur and embezzlement has been found in several villages including the village Sundari where the present applicant was the Pradhan. In furtherance thereof, District Magistrate, vide order dated 06.04.2022, had recommended the departmental inquiry against the Pradhan and Secretary of the concerned gram panchayat for embezzlement of public money and corruption.
5. It is submitted that as per communication dated 6.4.2022 made by District Magistrate to the present applicant (Annexure No. 5), a simple allegation has been made that the cost of one C.C. bench along with its’ transportation is only Rs. 6,000/- however, the present applicant and Secretary have submitted the expenses per bench to the extent of Rs. 6250/- therefore, there is an embezzlement amounting Rs. 9994/-. Accordingly, Pradhan and Secretary were held liable to deposit the excess amount in State exchequer. As such, the present applicant has been directed to deposit the half of the said excess amount viz. to the tune of Rs. 4997/-. It is further submitted that the excess amount which had been directed to be deposited by the applicant had already been deposited by her on 11.7.2022. It is next submitted that the genesis of the crime as mentioned in the F.I.R. regarding non availability of the adequate number of benches on spot has been negated in subsequent inquiry report dated 12.4.2022. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the co-accused (Secretary of the Gram Panchayat) namely, Parthraj Singh has already been granted anticipatory bail up to the culmination of the trial by order dated 19.3.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1475 of 2025.
6. Learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent has vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that at this stage innocence of the present applicant cannot be inferred, therefore, this anticipatory bail is liable to be rejected. It is next submitted that the present applicant has already admitted her offence in view of depositing the excess amount i.e. Rs. 4997/- which has been directed to be deposited by her.
7. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsels for the parties coupled with the facts and circumstances of the present case and the documents available on the record, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant is liable to be granted anticipatory bail inasmuch as there is an apprehension of arrest of the present applicant in the aforesaid Case Crime No. 83 of 2022. He was through out on anticipatory bail during the investigation as mentioned above.
8. As such, the present applicant, namely, Smt. Tayara Bano is granted anticipatory bail, till conclusion of the trial, on the personal bond and two sureties furnished by the present applicant in pursuance of the previous order dated 7.5.2024 passed by this Court, subject to following conditions:-
(i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court on each dates unless inevitable.
(ii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) That the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.
(iv) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the concerned Court below will be at liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail of the applicant after recording reasons.
(v) In case, it is found that applicant has obtained this order concealing any material facts, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
9. It is clarified that observations made in this order at this stage is limited to the purpose of determination of this anticipatory bail application only and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The concerned Court below shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions according to law on the basis of materials / evidences on record.
10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 10.6.2025/Gaurav
[ad_2]
Source link