IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.
Dr. Rajni Tripathi – Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. – Opposite Party
Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8059 of 2023
Decided On : 02-08-2023
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 32 - Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 419,420,467,468,471 and 204 – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Sections 313, 482, 438 (6) (a) & (b) and 439 - Dowry Prohibition Act - Examination of accused – Cheating and dishonesty - Allegation is that applicant, who is said to be Principal Degree College, was placed under suspension - Alleged that a National Seminar on Hindi and Economics was organized College with funds received from University Grant Commission, New Delhi and other sources was the co-ordinator of National Seminar and applicant was her complaint Held, Applicant shall file an undertaking to effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on dates fixed for evidence and witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of applicant - statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C - Opinion of trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against his in accordance with law - Application stands disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
1. Vakalatnama on behalf of applicant has been filed by Mr Virendra Singh, Advocate today, which is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri V. P. Srivastava, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr Prashant Vyas and Mr Surendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sree Prakash Dwivedi & Mr Amrendra Nath Singh, learned counsels for the informant and Mr Amrit Raj Chaurasiya, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
3. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
4. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 676 of 2013, under sections 419,420,467,468,471 IPC, P.S. Civil Lines, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.
5. In short, the prosecution allegation is that the applicant, who is said to be Principal of Prayag Mahila Vidyapeeth Degree College, was placed under suspension since February, 2013. It is alleged that a National Seminar on Hindi and Economics was organized on 21, 22 and 23 February 2009 in the College with funds received from University Grant Commission, New Delhi and other sources. Dr. Madhu Tandon was the co-ordinator of National Seminar and the applicant was its director. Dr. Madhu Tandon, through her complaint dated 20.04.2009 informed that she had spent Rs. 12,500/-in the printing of souvenirs in the said Economics Seminar at the behest of the Principal, but the payment has not been made by the Principal/applicant. It is further alleged that in the meeting of the Managing Committee dated 16.07.2009, the Principal assured to pay the expenses incurred by Dr. Madhu Tandon and to present the details of the income expenditure of the Seminar, but neither she made the expenditure incurred by Dr. Madhu Tandon nor presented the details of income-expenditure and kept on procrastinating the matter on one pretext or the other, due to which the matter is said to be pending since long. Meanwhile, Dr. Madhu Tandon is said to be transferred to DAV College, Lucknow and from there she also sent several requests but the Principal did not reply. It is further alleged that in the audit from year 2008-09 up to year 2011-12, objection was raised that in the seminar held in the year 2008-09, money was withdrawn by opening a new account by Principal but neither the expenditure certificate nor the proceedings register were presented at the time of inspection/audit and the Principal is said to have withdrawn money from the annual festival fund in the year 2009, 2010 and 2011, but its expenditure certificates were not presented at the time of audit. Thereafter, the Principal informed the Managing Committee in its meeting on 05.10.2012 that she has received the bills/vouchers/documents of the Seminar 2009 and in compliance with the decision taken in the previous meeting of the Management Committee, she is presenting it to the Chairman. It is also alleged that after the meeting was over, the Managing Committee produced the photocopies of Bill Vouchers to the clerk in the college office. It is further alleged that again, in the meeting of the Management Committee dated 24.11.2012, Principal was directed to produce the original bill vouchers of Seminar 2009 then the Principal on 29.11.2012 is said to have produced the original bill vouchers of Seminar 2009 and Annual Festival year 2009 and 2011 in the college office. Thereafter, due to expenditure on items other than those prescribed by U.G.C. New Delhi and cash memos of more than Rs.20,000/-, the Management committee instructed the Manager to submit a report after preliminary investigation on the vouchers produced by Principal. After preliminary investigation, the Manager, found various vouchers suspicious, thereafter, a three-member inquiry committee was constituted by the Management Committee of the college to investigate the matter and the Principal was placed under suspension. It is also alleged that the Inquiry Committee issued the charge sheet to the Principal on 12.03.2013 which was re
Hussain and another Vs. Union of India
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Narinderjit Singh Sahni Vs Union of India
Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and others Vs state of Punjab
Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and others Vs state of Punjab
Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs State (NCT of Delhi) and another
Vinod Kumar Sharma and Another Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and another
SupremeToday
Anticipatory Bail – Successive anticipatory bail applications cannot be maintained without any change in circumstances.
Anticipatory bail can only be granted in exceptional circumstances and successive bail applications should demonstrate a change in circumstances.
Anticipatory bail – Being an extra-ordinary remedy, it should be resorted to only in a special case.
The court reaffirms that anticipatory bail is not to be granted where there is substantial evidence indicating involvement in serious offences affecting societal interests.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when the applicant demonstrates no direct involvement in the alleged crime, especially when personal liberty is at stake and the charge-sheet has been filed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.