ANJU GUGNANI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 130 dated 23.10.2012 registered at Police Station Sadar Kapurthala, District Kapurthala, for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120 -B IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for custodial interrogation. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. No offence of fraud or cheating has been committed by the petitioner. She is the owner of the Vistar Add Company and has taken the money from Matrix Infosys regarding the advertisement etc.

(2.) ON the other hand, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail petition and stated that keeping in view the serious nature and gravity of allegations against the petitioner, he is not entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail.

(3.) FROM the perusal of the record, it is clear that the petitioner, who is running Vistar Add Company, is the wife of main accused Ajesh Gugnani and as per evidence, huge amount has been got deposited in the account of her Company, which as per the Memorandum of Understanding cannot be taken from the LCs. The amount is to be taken in the name of the PTU and only the PTU after deducting its share has to give the amount to the RC. In the present case, the amount has been directly taken by the petitioner as well as other co -accused and as per allegations at this stage, they have committed irregularity and fraud of a huge amount running into crores as per order of the lower Court and also as per the arguments of the learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and learned counsel for the complainant.