Amita Singh Tomar vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Rajesh Kumar Gupta, J

The applicant has filed the first bail application under Section 482 of BNSS, of the Cr.P.C. seeking grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.439/2023 registered at Police Station Badoda, District Sheopur (M.P.) for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 120-B of IPC and Section 13 of Prevention of Corruption Act.

The case of prosecution in short, is that applicant working on the post of Tehsildar has defalcated an amount which was required to be transferred to the persons affected by flood under the scheme of State Government granting flood relief and instead of transferring the fund to the beneficiaries, the amount has been defalcated. The present applicant was instrumental in the aforesaid defalcation of money. Accordingly, offence was registered.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is an old lady aged about 59 years and is on the verge of her retirement. There is no direct or indirect evidence against the present applicant. She has only been implicated falsely in this case on basis of the memorandum of the co-accused persons. The alleged assessment sheet/proposal was prepared by the concerned Patwaris and thereafter, the same was verified by the Revenue Inspector and Naib Tehsildar and after due verification by them, the aforesaid sheet was brought before the present applicant. The only work assigned to the present applicant to sign the aforesaid document and forward it. The bank account and other details were prepared by the concerned Patwaris. The applicant has not received any money in her accounts and she is not illegally benefitted in any manner. Even, initially the name of the present applicant was not figured in the FIR.

It is further argued that the other co-accused persons have been granted benefit of bail. Seven co-accused persons including the Patawaris have been granted benefit of bail by this Court. Some other co-accused persons have been granted bail by the trial court itself. But, the present applicant, who is neither beneficiary of the alleged amount, nor she played any role in preparation of list of beneficiaries, therefore, the case of the present applicant in on better footing than those co-accused persons who have been granted bail. Therefore, the criminal proceedings are an abuse of the process of law. The applicant is a law abiding citizen and has not criminal or tainted background. No further custodial interrogation is required in the matter. The applicant is permanent resident of District Sheopur (M.P.), therefore, there is no likelihood of her absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is further submitted that applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by this Court. Conclusion of the trial will take sufficiently long time. Hence, prayed for grant of regular bail to the applicant.

Learned counsel for the State as well as counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer and prayed for its rejection by submitting that the present FIR was lodged based on acts of forgery, cheating, misrepresentation, and fraudulent conduct committed by the applicant. These acts constitute clear criminal offences.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary.

From perusal of the case diary, this Court finds that statements of Rajkumar Sharma, Manju Dixit, Laxminarayan Gorachiya and Mewaram Gorachiya, her their statements have categorically stated that the present applicant was given some illegal financial benefits in exchange of approval of defalcation of alleged amount. The amount alleged to be defalcated in huge and more particularly, it belong to public funds. Hence, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is hereby dismissed.