Ku. Deepa Nigam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3626 of 2016 Ku. Deepa Nigam, Aged About 29 Years, D/o S. K. Nigam R/o H. No. C/1997, Mini L.I.G. Rajajipuram, Lucknow (U.P.) ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The P.S. Tarbahar, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For applicant - Shri Somnath Verma, Advocate. For Respondent/State - Shri Om.P. Sahu, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 14/07/2016 1.

The applicant has preferred this application for grant of bail as she is arrested in connection with Crime No.112/2014 registered in Police Station Tarbahar, Bilaspur (C.G.) for offence punishable under sections 420, 406/34 of Indian Penal Code.

2.

As per the prosecution case a report was made by one Abhishek Dubey that he was asked by one Manish Nigam who was running one Renatuss Credit Cooperative Society Limited and was President of Mahima Trade Centre to deposit Rs.18 lakhs in the fixed deposit so that amount would be paid with high rate of interest after six months. Accordingly, Rs.18 lakhs was deposited and post dated cheque of Rs.18,76,000/- were given to the complainant. Subsequently, when date of maturity came on 4/04/2014 it was revealed that said Cooperative Society and Trade Centre have been closed and the applicant who is also Vice President they have fled away 3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the entire allegation is attributed to Manish Nigam and not to this applicant, she was an

employee of the society and no seizure has been made and she being lady the applicant may be released on bail.

4.

Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 5.

Perused the case diary and the documents which shows that apart from the complainant various persons also deposited amount in Renatuss Credit Cooperative Society Limited and the applicant was Vice President of Renatuss Credit Cooperative Society Limited along with others. Taking into role played by the applicant that she was also Vice President and has also signed various cheques which were dishonoured in favour of the beneficiaries/depositors. Considering the way the organized offence has been committed so as to take away money of the people by alluring them into the scheme. Taking into background of the case, the way the offence has been committed it cannot be ruled out if applicant is enlarged on bail, she may tamper the evidence, therefore this court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

6.

Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed. Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE gouri