Rajasthan High Court

CRLMB/16879/2016 of SMT SANDHYA SHARMA Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH PP on 22 December 2016

COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B.Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 16879 / 2016 Smt. Sandhya Sharma D/o Shri Uma Shankar Sharma, by Caste Brahamin,, Aged About 60 Years, R/o 64/507, Sector Ward No.22, Pratap Nagar, Tehsil Sanganer District Jaipur. At Present in Central Jail,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B.Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 16879 / 2016

Smt. Sandhya Sharma D/o Shri Uma Shankar Sharma, by CasteBrahamin,, Aged About 60 Years, R/o 64/507, Sector Ward No.22,Pratap Nagar, Tehsil Sanganer District Jaipur. At Present inCentralJail,Ajmer.

Versus

State of Rajasthan Through P.P.

----Petitioner

----Respondent

__________________________________________________

Counsel For Petitioner(s) : Shri Harendra Singh Sinsinwar. Counsel For Respondent(s) : Shri R.R.Baisla, PP.

__________________________________________________

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINAOrder

22/12/2016

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Codeof Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking regular bail in F.I.R.No.267/2010 registered at Police Station, Beawar City Distt. Ajmerfor offences under Section 420, 406 and 120-B of Indian PenalCode, 1860 and Section 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the Prize Chits andMoney Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978.

Heard.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted thatthe petitioner had resigned from the post of Director of company,that is M/s Oro Trade Network (India) Limited on 05.10.2008.

[CRLMB-16731/2016]

Page 1 of 2

F.I.R. in the present case was registered on 02.06.2010 underSection 420, 406 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 andSection 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Act. Offence was allegedly committedin the year 2009. Petitioner could not be held criminallyresponsible for any act committed by the company after she hadresigned. Petitioner is a cancer patient and is undergoing medicaltreatment. In similar F.I.Rs, petitioner has been grantedanticipatory bail by this Court. Petitioner is in custody since28.08.2016. Challan has already been presented in the Court andconclusion of trial may take time.

Learned State Counsel has opposed the petition.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the caseand without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, thispetition is allowed. Petitioner be admitted to bail subject tosatisfaction of the Trial Court.

(SABINA)J.

N.Gandhi/c/8

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead