SUNITA DEVI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner Smt. Sunita Devi under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in FIR No. 89/2013 registered at Police Station Banipark, Jaipur lodged against the accused petitioner and her husband and on Ramesh Singh for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC lodged by India Bulls Housing Finance Limited registered office F60 Second Floor Malhotra Building Canaught Palace and Branch office M -4 Sangam House Church Road Jaipur and against the order dated 9.10.2013 passed by Additional Sessions Judge No. 14, Jaipur Metropolitan rejecting the bail application of the accused petitioner in Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 81/2013.

(2.) BRIEFLY , stated the facts of the case are that India Bulls Housing Finance Limited through Sandeep Kumar, complainant, filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate No. 17 Jaipur Metropolitan under Section 190 Cr.P.C. against the accused petitioner and her husband Narendra Kumar Shah and also against one Ramesh Singh resident of 261 J.P. Colony Naya Khera Jaipur for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC stating therein that the accused petitioner, her husband and Ramesh Singh contacted the Branch office of the India Bulls for purchasing plot No. 71 Balaji Vihar Yojna and in this respect one agreement dated 20.6.2011 was shown and on producing the original papers of the plot Rs. 7,10,000/ - was sanctioned to the accused petitioner and her husband. The husband of the accused petitioner and accused petitioner started paying monthly installments. On 4.12.2012 when the husband of the accused petitioner and the accused petitioner approached, and the employee of the India Bulls went to JDA along with the original papers came to know that the said plot is not of Ramesh Singh accused, but it belongs to other Ramesh Singh. It is alleged in the complaint that the accused petitioner, her husband and Ramesh Singh caused loss to the company and benefiting themselves in a fraudulent manner. The said act of the accused petitioner and other two persons comes within the ambit of sections 420, 467, 471 and 120 B IPC. Since the forgery was done in the office of the sub Registrar, they contracted the Police Station Banipark but the FIR was not registered hence the company filed the complaint before the Judicial Magistrate No. 17 Jaipur Metropolitan. The Judicial Magistrate forwarded the complaint under Section 156(3) to the Police Station Banipark Jaipur and the Police Station Bani Park on finding that on the basis of the complaint a case under Sections 420, 467, 471 and 120 -B IPC is made out and hence they registered the above FIR No. 89/2013.

(3.) APPREHENDING her arrest, the accused petitioner filed bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. before the Additional Sessions Judge No. 14 Jaipur Metropolitan, who after hearing the accused petitioner and the APP concerned and on perusing the record, rejected the bail application vide order dated 9.10.2013. Hence this bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.