Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 926 (HP)

Geeta Sharma v. State of H. P.

2013-11-01

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2013
JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (oral). Learned Additional Advocate General has filed the status report and ASI Om Prakash Sharma, I.O., Police Station, Theog has produced the record. 2. Consequent upon the directions issued on the previous dates, the accused-petitioner remained associated with the investigation of the case. The investigation, however, is still in progress and according to learned Additional Advocate General, the amount she allegedly embezzled, is yet to be recovered from her. The plea raised on behalf of the accused-petitioner, however, is that whatever amount pertaining to ‘Rogi Kalyan Samiti’, she collected; during discharge of her duties stands deposited with the complainant i.e. Senior Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Theog, who is Drawing and Disbursing Officer also. The record reveals that she has produced one office order and two receipts to show that under the directions of the complainant she was required to deposit the amount in question with him and that she had been depositing the same with him from time to time. The receipts he allegedly issued have been pressed in service in this behalf. 3. Learned Additional Advocate General has disputed the authenticity and genuineness of the documents so produced by the accused-petitioner on account of being not genuine. The status report reveals that the steps to ascertain the genuineness and authenticity of these documents through scientific process, are being taken. 4. True it is that the offence allegedly committed by the accused-petitioner is grievous and heinous one as she has misappropriated the money, being collected in the Hospital by way of user charges etc. for the welfare and well being of the poor patients, who have no means to bear the medical expenses. However, the investigation in the case is still in progress. There is no complaint that the accused-petitioner when called upon to join the investigation failed to do so. She even is permanent resident of District Shimla and as such can reasonably be believed to have roots in the Society. Therefore, there is no apprehension of her fleeing away from justice or jumping over the bail. 5. There is no complaint that the accused-petitioner when called upon to join the investigation failed to do so. She even is permanent resident of District Shimla and as such can reasonably be believed to have roots in the Society. Therefore, there is no apprehension of her fleeing away from justice or jumping over the bail. 5. The recovery of the amount in question from the accused petitioner, no doubt, has been vigorously urged and this petition sought to be dismissed on this score, however, if at some later stage during the course of investigation it surfaced that the amount in question was not deposited with the complainant and rather found to be misappropriated by her, the investigating agency may approach the Court by filing application for seeking appropriate orders in this regard. I therefore, allow this petition and it is ordered that in the event of the arrest of the accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.138/13, registered with Police Station, Theog, she shall be released on bail, subject to her furnishing personal bond in the sum of `50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting Police Officer/I.O., and shall further abide by the following conditions:- a. She shall make herself available for interrogation as and when required and shall cooperate with the investigating Officer to conduct the investigation in a manner so as to take it to its logical end; b. She shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; c. She shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police officer; and d. She shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 6. It is clarified that if the petitioner misuses her liberty or violates any of the conditions imposed upon her; the Investigating Agency shall be free to move this Court for cancellation of the bail. 7. The observations hereinabove shall remain confined to the disposal of this petition and have no bearing on the merits of the case. The application stands disposed of.