Vidya Rani Pullari v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.9637 OF 2016 ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
2. The present Criminal Petition came to be filed by the petitioner/A.1 under Section 438 Cr.P.C., seeking release in the event of her arrest in Crime No.50 of 2016 of Malkipuram Police Station, East Godavari District, registered against her and others for the offences punishable under Sections 417 and 420 read with 34 IPC.
3. The case of the prosecution is that after completion of his I.T.I., the informant was informed by A.4, who is his villager, that there are vacancies in O.N.G.C. and he can get the job through A.1, who is daughter of A.3, and her husband A.2. Thereafter, the informant met A.1 and A.2 in the house of A.3, and A.4 was also present there. A.1 to A.3 stated that there are vacancies in O.N.G.C. with salary of Rs.45,000/- and other benefits, and if he pays Rs.3,00,000/- they can guarantee the job through high officials in the Corporation. Subsequently, the amount was reduced to Rs.2,75,000/-. It is alleged that the father of the informant mortgaged their house and paid first
instalment of Rs.1,95,000/- to A.1 in the presence of the other accused. On the instructions of A.1, the remaining amount of Rs.80,000/- was credited to the account of A.2. The accused also collected amounts from 9 more persons of the same village, but, neither provided employment as promised nor repaid the amounts so collected. Basing on these allegations, the present case came to be registered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that entire allegations made in the report are false and that the petitioner is falsely implicated into the case.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the same.
6. A perusal of the material on record would show that substantial amounts were collected by the petitioner from the informant and 9 more persons of the same village promising to provide employment in O.N.G.C. but failed to do so. Criminal Petition No.7882 of 2016 filed by A.2 and A.3 seeking anticipatory bail was dismissed by a learned Judge of this Court vide order dated 15.07.2016. Having regard to the circumstances stated above and taking into consideration the gravity of the allegations made, this Court is not inclined to consider the request of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
_____________________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR Date: 20.07.2016 DRK THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.9637 OF 2016
20.07.2016