Smt. Kanchan Kumari Ramtirath v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1014 of 2017 Smt. Kanchan Kumari Ramtirath W/o Sushil Singh, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Ropahiya, Police Station Bhokbha, District Rohtas Sasaram (Bihar) Presently Residing At Balaji Residency Ankleshwar, Police Station Ankleshwar, District Bharuch (Surat Gujrat) ---- Applicant

Versus

The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Lalbag, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Mr. M.K. Bhaduri, Advocate.

For Respondent/State :

Mr. Manish Nigam, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 04/01/2018 Heard.

1.

The applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.196/2016 registered at police station - Lalbag, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence under Section 420, 471, 429/34 of IPC. 2.

Case of the prosecution is that the applicant and co-accused opened an account of a nonexistent company namely B.S.S.P. Vanijya Pratishthan where the sale proceeds of fish seeds of complainant company were being deposited and in this manner, the complainant company was cheated by the applicant and co-accused.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that in so far as present applicant is concerned, she was only a paper partner and account was opened in her name only to facilitate work of the company of which the main working partner was co-accused Pramod Singh. As Pramod Singh has been granted regular bail, applicant being lady shall be protected by anticipatory bail. 4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes prayer and submits that more than one crore of rupees was deposited in the account in the name of the applicant, therefore, the applicant is also equally involved in

the alleged commission of offence.

5.

Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the amount involved, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant, the application is rejected. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant would argue that the Court below may be directed to consider application for regular bail as early as possible and preferably on the same day.

6.

In case the applicant surrenders and applies for grant of regular bail, her application shall be decided if possible on the same day or in any case within 3 days.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Rekha