← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./21893/2024bail granted

Rajni Priya v. The State Through Central Bureau Of Investigation

2024-09-20Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21893 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2017 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Patna ====================================================== Rajni Priya W/o- Late Amit Kumar P/A- Awdhesh Menson Parvati Lane PsTikamanjhi Dist- Bhagalpur P/A- R/o- 103, Brahman Tola Ps- Sabaur ViillSabaur Anchal Sabaur Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Through Central Bureau of Investigation Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajit Kumar For the C.B.I.

:

Ms. Nivedita Nirvikar- Sr. Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-09-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned senior counsel appearing for the C.B.I. Ms. Nivedita Nirvikar.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had approached this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.10259 of 2024 and the same was allowed by an order dated 20.09.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of 12 cases, but then, all the cases emanates from Srijan Scam. It is also

2/4 submitted that petitioner has been granted the privilege of regular bail in 06 cases, out of 12 cases, but then, one regular bail application has also been rejected. It is next submitted that petitioner is in custody since 11.08.2023.

4. The learned counsel next submits that initially when the FIR was instituted the petitioner was not named in the FIR, but after the case was handed over to the C.B.I., the C.B.I. investigated the case threadbare and thereafter, the role of the petitioner transpired in the case and it was alleged that petitioner in criminal conspiracy of bank officials used to transfer money back to the account of DM, Bhagalpur, so that the cheques issued by DM, Bhagalpur does not get dishonoured on account of insufficient balance in the bank account. The money was returned to the account of the DM, Bhagalpur only to conceal the diversion and misappropriation of the money, which was credited in the account of M/s SMVSSL. It is also submitted that petitioner is alleged to have issued four cheques as detailed at Para-10 of the counter-affidavit of the C.B.

I. for concealing the misappropriation of money by crediting the cheques in the account of the D.M., Bhagalpur, so that the cheques issued by the D.M., Bhagalpur does not get dishonoured.

3/4 sheet has been submitted, as such, no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner to jail.

5. The the learned senior counsel appearing for the C.B.I. is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that charge-sheet has been submitted and investigation stands completed, as such, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in jail when she already has been granted bail in six other cases, but then, the learned senior counsel for the C.B.I. submits that during the course of investigation, the petitioner had not cooperated in the investigation and in the event, if bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove her innocence.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail on her furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, CBI-II, Patna in connection with R. C. Case No.11(A) of 2017.

4/4

7. The application stands allowed.

8. However, in the event, if the learned trial Court comes to a conclusion that the petitioner after her release is trying to delay the trial in any manner, the learned trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after recording reasons.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U