JUDGMENT

1. This is the first anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.0316/2022 registered at Police Station - Bhawarkuwa, Indore (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Section 420, 409, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. As per the prosecution story, present applicant's husband Dwarkadish Agrawal is running a partnership firm in the name of M/s. Ashutosh Enterprises and initially present applicant was a partner in the firm as per the Partnership Deed dated 24/12/2012. M/s. Ashutosh Enterprises purchased a land situated at Village Chitawad, Tehsil and District Indore bearing survey No.153/1d/Min-1 and No.153/1[k total admeasuring 0.488 hectare from one Lalchand and Smt. Anuradha for a total sale consideration of Rs.2,95,00,000/-. The said amount was paid through a account payee cheque. On 10/02/2016 a registered sale deed was executed in favour of the Kundanlal Jaiswal and Kundanlal Jaiswal died in the year 2019. On 07/12/2017 present applicant along with other co-accused persons has a criminal conspiracy and prepared a forged and counterfeited partnership deed, which was not signed by the complainant Kishanlal and Kundanlal. Complainant Kishanlal filed a complaint case before the JMFC, Indore and vide order dated 15/03/2022 JMFC, Indore directed the Police Station Bhawarkuwa to register the FIR. Accordingly, offence has been registered against the present applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in this matter. There is no legal evidence available on record to connect the applicant with the aforementioned offence. There is no allegation made against the applicant in the whole FIR. She has no role in the business. She was merely a non-executive and namesake partner in the firm. She has retired from the said partnership firm on 22/07/2014 and during her tenure in the firm from 24/12/2012 to 22/07/2014 complainant has no business relationship with the applicant and the partnership firm.

As per the Partnership Amended Deed dated 22/07/2014 applicant's husband was holding 58% share and Kishanlal and Kundanlal were given share of 21% each. Kundanlal has executed a registered relinquishment deed on 19/12/2017 in favour of the firm and the complainant Kishanlal has signed the registered relinquishment deed as a witness. The handwriting expert K. K. Sahukar has opined in his report that Kishanlal Rai has signed the deed on 07/12/2017.

No criminal antecedent has been found against the present applicant and final conclusion of trial shall take sufficient long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of anticipatory bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper.

4. Per-contra, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant Kishanlal opposed the anticipatory bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that Dwarkadish misrepresented the complainant Kishanlal and Late Kundanlal. The accused persons also misused the income tax ID of Late Kundanlal by forging his signature on the same. Applicant is also a beneficiary of the fraud committed by the accused Dwarkadish. Present applicant also executed a Partnership Amended Deed dated 07/12/2017. Hence, he prays that anticipatory bail application preferred by the applicant be dismissed.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent - State also opposes the anticipatory bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that proceeding under Section 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. has been drawn against the present applicant and Rs.1,000/- cash reward has been proclaimed in respect of the arrest of the present applicant. Therefore, she is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

6. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case dairy and the documents produced by bot