SARITA JANGRA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of both the petitions mentioned above filed by petitioners Sarita Jangra and Manphool for grant of anticipatory bail.

(2.) RESPONDENT No.2 Rati Ram has filed the private complaint alleging therein that Sarita Jangra, who was the Sarpanch during the period 2005 to 2010 and petitioner Manphool was working as the Panchayat Secretary, have embezzled the Panchayat funds by preparing the bogus record. On the basis of the private complaint filed by respondent No.2, the petitioners have been summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467 and 471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') vide order dated 8.01.2015 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Charkhi Dadri.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners pleaded that the complaint has been filed by respondent No.2 due to political rivalry in the village. He contended that if there was any irregularity in the accounts, that has already been settled and the amount has already been deposited in the Govt. Treasury. He contended that there is no evidence regarding fabrication of record. He further contended that falsity of the version of complainant is evident from the fact that he has involved Manphool, the Panchayat Secretary, who was appointed in this Gram Panchayat only in December 2009, whereas, the disputed period is prior to that. He further contended that both the petitioners have already appeared before the trial Court in compliance of the order passed by this Court and have been admitted to interim bail. They have already joined the proceedings. So, they deserve the concession of anticipatory bail.