ANSHU JAIN Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition filed under S.438 CrPC, bail petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail in FIR No. 9, dated 3.4.2016, under Ss. 420, 406, 409, 411, 467, 468, 471, 201, 217 and 120B IPC and S.13(1)d((ii) of Prevention of Corruption Act, registered with Police Station, CID Bharari, Himachal Pradesh.

(2.) Sequel to order dated 17.10.2019, Superintendent of Police, HP State CID/Cyber Crime, Shimla, has come present with the record. Learned Additional Advocate General has also placed on record status report prepared by the investigating agency on the basis of investigation carried out by it. Record perused and returned.

(3.) Learned Additional Advocate General, on the instructions of the Investigating Officer, fairly stated that the petitioner has joined the investigation and there is nothing required to be recovered from the bail petitioner. However, learned Additional Advocate General, while expressing his apprehension that in the event of bail petitioner being enlarged on bail, she may flee from justice or tamper with the prosecution evidence, stated that, in case, this Court intends to enlarge the petitioner on bail, She may be imposed strict conditions.