Jyoti Gupta @ Jyoti Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14973 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-496 Year-2018 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== JYOTI GUPTA @ JYOTI DEVI Wife of Late Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Prasad Soni Resident of Mohalla- Sultanpur, Trimurti Nagar, Danapur-cum-Khagaul, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nil Kamal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Arun Kumar Arun, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-09-2021 Heard Mr. Nil Kamal, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar Arun for the informant. The State is represented by Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, learned APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of her arrest in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 496 of 2018 dated 26.07.2018 instituted for the offences under Sections 420, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The accusation in the FIR, which has been lodged by the Branch Manager of a non-banking company viz. Saija Finance Pvt. Ltd., is that recovery of the loan granted by the company to various people in the locality was entrusted to five groups of people. It was later found out that the money which was recovered
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14973 of 2019(5) dt.29-09-2021 2/3 by such persons at the instance of the banking company was never deposited in the company. As such, the name of few persons including that of the petitioner falling in various groups, who were entrusted with the task of recovery of loan amount was made and against them the subject FIR has been lodged for embezzlement of the money belonging to the company.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the offence relates to the period falling in the year 2018, and that also when the petitioner had lef the job as the recovery agent of the company. Apart from this, it has been submitted that the assessment of the money said to have been swindled by the petitioner is absolutely vague. The accusation, therefore, is only against such persons who did not continue to work in the company. Under similar circumstances, a Bench of this Court has granted anticipatory bail to one of the accused persons of this case vide order dated 02.09.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 13019 of 2019.
Regard being had to the aforestated facts and the gender of the petitioner, she is directed to be released on bail, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14973 of 2019(5) dt.29-09-2021 3/3 order, on her furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danapur, Patna in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 496 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Ashutosh Kumar, J) krishna/- U T