Smt. Pushpa Gangboier v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 965 of 2016 • Smt. Pushpa Gangboier W/o Shri Raghunandan Gangboier, Aged About 39 Years Cast Teli, R/o Village- Jagannathpur Sankra, Tah. And P. S. Balod, Civil And Revenue District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through State Economic Offences Investigation Bureau / Anti Corruption Bureau Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant :

Mr. Rakesh Thakur, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Mr. Sangarsh Pandey, Dy.G.A.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 27-10-2016 1.

This application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C has been filed by the applicant apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No. 51 of 2009 registered at Police Station State Economic Offence Wing/Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur (CG) for offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B/34 of the IPC and Section 13 (1)(D), 13(2) of the Anti Corruption Act. 2.

As per case of the prosecution, the applicant on the basis of forged experience certificate had obtained job of Shiksha Karmi Grade-II and therefore, the persons who were entitled to get job were deprived and thereby the aforesaid offence has been committed. 3.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the case of the present applicant is similar to that of other co-accused namely Pradeep Kumar Lanjewar who has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 17-2-2016 passed by this

Court in M.Cr.C.(A) No 100 of 2016., therefore, present applicant may also be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail on the ground of parity.

4.

Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, however, he does not dispute the fact that similarly placed other co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail. 5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the case diary and documents.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations leveled against the applicant and further considering the fact that similarly placed other co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail, I am inclined to extend benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

7.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, she shall be released on bail by the officer arresting her on her executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. The applicant shall also abide by the following conditions: (i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Police Officer;

(iii) that the applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Certified copy today as per rules.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Raju