DIVYA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A.3 in Crime No.113/2018, of Cybercrime Police Station, Rachakonda, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 506, 120-B of I.P.C r/w Section 66-C, 66-D of Income Tax Act and Section 5 of Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, l999 and Sections 4 and 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/A.3 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondentState and perused the material available on record.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner/A.3 would submit that the petitioner/A.3 is innocent and was falsely implicated and the charges against her are without any evidence in support of allegations. There is no specific allegation against petitioner/A.3 in the complaint filed by the de-facto complainant and is not a beneficiary to any of the transaction or associated with the alleged companies as Director or Partner. Petitioner/A.3 married A.1 in February 2018 and is only housewife and no way involved in the affairs of the companies floated by A.1. There is vague and passing allegation on petitioner/A.3 by the de-facto complainant and petitioner/A.3 was selectively included in F.I.R as A.3. Though the de-facto complainant specifically alleged the role of Ratna Saroja, her name was not included as accused or as witness. There is no allegation on petitioner/A.3 of indulging in collection of deposits except that she is the wife of accused No.1, and ultimately prayed to grant bail by allowing the petition.