Point of Law: A huge amount of Rs.50 lakhs has been transferred to the account of applicant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

JUDGMENT :

1. List has been revised.

2. Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant in person is taken on record.

3. Heard Ms. Princess Mahi @ Saher Naqvi, applicant in person, Sri Pankaj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

4. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.930 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 I.P.C. at Police Station Colonelganj, District Prayagraj with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.

PROSECUTION STORY:

5. The FIR was lodged by Rakesh Kumar, an ex-army-man, with the allegations that the applicant Princes Mahi @ Saher Naqvi had taken Rs.20 lakhs from him in the year 2018 to get his wife admitted to a job in junior high school. She had even introduced the informant to one Rajeev Tripathi at the office of BSA. The applicant is stated to have neither returned the amount nor got the said job to his wife and she kept on dilly dallying with him. On 1.1.2019, the applicant is stated to have taken Rs.50 lakhs from the informant in lieu of a sale of a 200 square meters plot in Arazi No.86 of NK Mukherji Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad. The said amount of Rs.50 lakhs was transferred from the account no.37438827327 of Kchipra Business Solution Pvt. Ltd. of State Bank, Branch Sub-Area Cantt., Prayagraj to the bank account no.6177000100027382 of the applicant through NEFT. It transpired later on that the documents of the said plot are fake and the said forgery has been committed by the applicant in conspiracy with other members of the family. The applicant is stated to have fleeced and fooled the informant on one pretext or other and even threatened him.

6. The FIR was instituted at police station Colonelganj, Prayagraj on 25.10.2019 at about 01:12 a.m.

RIVAL CONTENTIONS:

(Arguments of applicant-in-person)

7. The applicant in-person has pressed the anticipatory bail application on the following grounds:-

(i) that she has been falsely implicated in this case and has nothing to do with the said offence. The allegations with respect to the supply of Rs.20 lakhs are per se false as there is nothing on record to suggest that any amount has been withdrawn from any account or transferred to the applicant. The said transaction is in cash, which is false.

(ii) that already final report (charge-sheet) has been submitted and the cognizance by the trial court has been taken. The FIR has been lodged against all the family members just to harass them.

(iii) that after registration of FIR, the applicant and co-accused person Rizwan Ali (father of the applicant) had approached this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.25063 of 2019, in which ad-interim protection was granted to them vide order dated 29.1.2020. The said order has been filed as Annexure No.2 to the affidavit filed with the bail application.

(iv) that after the submission of final report (charge-sheet), the applicant had challenged it by filing a Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.18674 of 2022 and prayed for quashing the entire charge-sheet including the summoning order dated 12.1.2022.

(v) that she is a bona fide person as is evident from the fact that she had filed a Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.11906 of 2022 praying for a direction to issue mandamus to District Magistrate, Prayagraj regarding illegal encroachment on plot no.86/1, measuring area 2.05 hectare and plot no.86/2, measuring area 0.864 hectare. The said writ petition is pending before this Court.

(vi) that transfer of Rs.50 lakhs to her account is admitted, but the said amount has been transferred from the account of the company Kchipra Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and the matter is between applicant and the said company, that too is civil in nature and the informant, who is a stranger to the said transaction, has converted it into a criminal case which is not sustainable in the eyes of law.

(vii) that the agreement between the applican