JUDGMENT Gurvinder Singh Gill, J. This order shall dispose off the aforesaid four petitions filed on behalf of Sangeeta Verma, Vikas Verma, Sanjiv Kumar and Gaurav Gupta respectively, seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of aforementioned FIR. 2. The FIR in question was lodged on the allegations that Girish Verma, Executive Officer, Zirakpur had amassed wealth beyond his known sources of income by way of misusing his position and had collected huge amounts of money by resorting to corrupt means. The accounts of Girish Verma pertaining to the period from 01.04.2008 to 31.03.2021 were checked with regard to his income and expenditure and from which it was revealed that while the said Officer had a total income of Rs.7,95,76,097/- during the said check period from his known sources of income, but during the said period his expenditure worked out to Rs.15,11,15,448/-. In other words, it was found that he had spent an amount of Rs.7,15,39,352/- (89.90%) in excess of his income. It is further the case of prosecution that the money collected by Girish Verma through corrupt means was shown in the accounts or adjusted with the help of his wife Sangeeta Verma, his son Vishal Verma, Gourav Gupta, Ashu Goel, Ashish Sharma, Pawan Kumar Sharma, Jasvir Singh, Baljit Singh, Mandeep Singh, Gurcharan Singh, Narinder Pal Singh etc. It is further the case of prosecution that Girish Verma had got transferred hefty amounts from various persons in his bank accounts and also in the accounts of his son Vikas Verma and his wife Sangeeta Verma through RTGS so as to show that the said money had been earned by legitimate means. 3. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that in the present case, the investigating agency in its zeal to implicate Girish Verma and other members of his family as well as some of their acquaintances has not bothered to make complete enquiries regarding the sources of income and had overlooked various important aspects of the matter, which go to root of the case. It has been submitted that while taking into account the rental income of the accused, an amount to the extent of 30% has been excluded on the premises that the same is also excluded for the purpose of income-tax as towards maintenance etc. It has been submitted that while taking into account the rental income of the accused, an amount to the extent of 30% has been excluded on the premises that the same is also excluded for the purpose of income-tax as towards maintenance etc. of the property, whereas practically such a huge amount to the extent of 30% of the rent is not required for maintaining the property and that in case the same is taken into account, a substantial amount of the alleged difference in income and expenditure would stand explained. It has also been submitted that the investigating agency has not taken into account the factum of various loans, as had been raised by Girish Verma and other members of his family. 4. While pressing the case of Sangeeta Verma, learned senior counsel has submitted that she has falsely been implicated in the present case solely on account of the fact that she happens to be wife of Girish Verma and that there is no evidence worth credence that she was part & parcel of the alleged conspiracy of amassing wealth by any illegal means. It has been submitted that the income earned by Sangeeta Verma (wife) and Vikas Verma (son) is duly reflected in income tax returns and that as such, there is no question of doubting the same. 5. It has been submitted on behalf of Gaurav Gupta and Sanjiv Kumar that they have also been falsely implicated in the present case solely on account of the fact that Vikas Verma (son of Girish Verma) was in partnership with Gaurav Gupta in a firm, namely, M/s Balaji Infra Buildtech and that before Vikas Verma was inducted as a partner w.e.f. 01.10.2020, Sanjiv Kumar had remained a partner in the said firm till 29.02.2020. 6. Lastly, it has been submitted that in case the entire income from all the sources including property income and the loan raised is taken into account, there would be hardly any difference in the income and expenditure during the check period. Learned senior counsel has submitted that all the petitioners in any case are willing to associate with the investigation and to render utmost cooperation and since the case in hand is mainly based on documentary evidence, their custodial interrogation is not warranted. 7. Learned senior counsel has submitted that all the petitioners in any case are willing to associate with the investigation and to render utmost cooperation and since the case in hand is mainly based on documentary evidence, their custodial interrogation is not warranted. 7. Opposing the petitions, learned State counsel has submitted that the evidence collected during the course of investigation clearly indicates that co-accused Girish Verma while misusing his position had amassed huge wealth, which is shown to have been earned by legitimate means either by showing unsecured loans or as rental income. It has been submitted that Vishal Verma, who is son of the principal accused Girish Verma, is shown to be dealing in crores of rupees though it is not clearly disclosed as to what kind of qualification and experience he has to be able to earn huge income. Learned State counsel has submitted that majority of the explanations put-forth on behalf of Girish Verma with respect to the huge income are made-up explanations and are not plausible. Learned State counsel has, thus, prayed for dismissal of all the petitions. 8. This Court has considered rival submissions. 9. The case of the prosecution is broadly to the effect that during the check period i.e. 01.04.2008 to 31.03.2021, the principal accused Girish Verma was found to have spent an amount of Rs.7,15,39,352/- in excess of his known sources of income. Even for the sake of arguments, if the contention put-forth on behalf of the petitioners regarding exclusion of 30% of the rental income towards maintenance etc. being on higher side is accepted and the said exclusion is limited to the extent of 10%, still there is lot of unexplained expenditure or addition of wealth on the part of principal accused and the other accused. 10. There are many glaring transactions, which cannot be overlooked and which point towards the complicity, not only of principal accused Girish Verma in amassing huge wealth, but also of all other co-accused in rendering their help to channelize the said ill-gotten wealth in such a manner so as to show the same to have been earned by legitimate means. Some of the facts, which surfaced during investigation against each of the petitioner, are as under: Sangeeta Verma - petitioner in CRM-M-17544-2023 Sangeeta Verma claims that she has received various unsecured loans total amounting to Rs. Some of the facts, which surfaced during investigation against each of the petitioner, are as under: Sangeeta Verma - petitioner in CRM-M-17544-2023 Sangeeta Verma claims that she has received various unsecured loans total amounting to Rs. 1,69,00,000/- and had rental securities to the tune of Rs.38,15,000/- from various friends between the years 2009 to 2020. The factum of extending unsecured loans by a large number of persons to a lady, who is not even a business entrepreneur or into any job has remained a mystery. Even, petitioner - Sangeeta Verma, who is on interim bail, has not furnished satisfactory explanation in respect of said loans. The details of said unsecured loans are as under: Sr. No. Name, Address & Mobile No. Date & amount Remarks 1. Suhana International 10.10.2014 Rs.3,00,000/- No information about the creditor and motive provided. Hence, this entry is yet to be verified. 2. Suhinderieet Singh (Died) 31.03.2016 Rs.10,00,000/- No information about the creditor and motive provided, only stated that he is dead does not absolve the petitioner from disclosing the real understanding behind this transaction. 3. Ajmer Singh Gill 02.03.2017 Rs.5,00,000/- He categorically stated that he did not know Girish Verma and/or Sangeeta Verma and has never provided any loan to them. 4. Sanjeev Kumar Gautam & Meena Gautam 16.03.2019 Rs.50,00,000/- She was contacted telephonically on 03.03.2023 & 06.03.2023 and asked to submit her statement to which she sought some more time citing her poor health. Meanwhile, Vikas Verma transferred Rs.20,00,000/- in her account on 09.03.2023, which clearly suggests influencing and alluring of a prime witness. 5. Poonam Duggal 04.03.2020 Rs.5,00,000/- 05.03.2020 Rs.10,00,000/- 20.03.2020 Rs.5,00,000/- Her husband Anil Duggal responded to call and admitted that he knew Girish Verma since loan and her wife Poonam Duggal’s partnership firm M/s Mystique Pharma had taken a portion of Sangeeta Verma’s Showroom on rent from 23.07.2021 till 12.02.2022 @ Rs.35,000/- per month. However, his wife did not appear to clarify about the said loan. 6. Nirpal Singh 17.01.2009 Rs.9,00,000/- Specific address or mobile number not provided. Yet to be verified. 7. Jagmohan Kabuli 22.05.2009 Rs.14,50,000/- No information about the creditor and motive provided. Yet to be verified. 8. Naresh Gupta, Chinar Heights 30.06.2009 Rs.5,00,000/- No information about the creditor and motive provided. Incomplete address and no contact number provided. Yet to be verified. 9. 6. Nirpal Singh 17.01.2009 Rs.9,00,000/- Specific address or mobile number not provided. Yet to be verified. 7. Jagmohan Kabuli 22.05.2009 Rs.14,50,000/- No information about the creditor and motive provided. Yet to be verified. 8. Naresh Gupta, Chinar Heights 30.06.2009 Rs.5,00,000/- No information about the creditor and motive provided. Incomplete address and no contact number provided. Yet to be verified. 9. Bikramjit Singh Sandhu Gursimran & Gurpreet Kaur 01.10.2009 Rs.25,00,000/- 22.05.2009 Rs.5,50,0007- His statements under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. dated 08.05.2023 were recorded, whereby he has stated that Girish Verma had returned Rs.30,50,000/- in cash. Moreover, on 08.05.2023 at 1322 hours Girish Verma spoke to him on WhatsApp call from his sister’s number and requested him not to submit any statement with Vigilance Bureau for some time, as he will soon be released on bail and thereafter he will sort out the things. 10. B.R.Gorver 03.02.2009 Rs.5,00,000/- No information about the creditor and motive provided. 11. Dollar Polypipes 2015-16 Rs.7,00,000/- No information about the creditor and motive provided. 12. Prem Chand Bansal, Rental Security 2008-09 Rs.35,00,000/- His statements under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. dated 12.05.2023 were recorded, whereby he has stated that he was doing real estate business in Zirakpur and Girish Verma being Estate Officer forced him to provide white entry of Rs.37,50,000/- during 2008-09 in the name of wife of Girish Verma and Girish Verma had further returned Rs.37,50,000/- in cash to him. 13. B.N.Sharma, Rental Security Rs.3,15,000 A copy of lease deed dated 31.11.2009 for a term of 5 years provided, as per which full 2nd floor and 1st floor (except 1 cabin) of SCO No.136 leased to B.N.Sharma. He has stated on 18.05.2023 that when he vacated the premises, he was returned this security in cash by Girish Verma. A copy of lease deed dated 31.11.2009 for a term of 5 years provided, as per which full 2nd floor and 1st floor (except 1 cabin) of SCO No.136 leased to B.N.Sharma. He has stated on 18.05.2023 that when he vacated the premises, he was returned this security in cash by Girish Verma. 11. During investigation, it has also surfaced that Sangeeta Verma purchased about 5 acres of land situated at Village Bareta, Mansa from Pawan Kumar and his wife Usha, old accomplice of Girish Verma doing real estate business in Zirakpur. He has stated on 18.05.2023 that when he vacated the premises, he was returned this security in cash by Girish Verma. 11. During investigation, it has also surfaced that Sangeeta Verma purchased about 5 acres of land situated at Village Bareta, Mansa from Pawan Kumar and his wife Usha, old accomplice of Girish Verma doing real estate business in Zirakpur. The type of land mentioned in the sale deeds was Nehri (Canal), whereas open storage/plinth by the name of M/s Manohar Open Plinth was constructed/present on this land having storage capacity of 25,200 Metric Tons and boundary wall across the abovesaid land also stood constructed before the said purchase. However, the commercial value of the land was not declared and the land was purchased vide 2 separate sale deeds only to keep the transaction amount below Rs.20 lakhs (Rs.18,57,000/- per sale deed). Pawan Kumar has other financial transaction also with the family. 12. It has also surfaced during investigation that a plot measuring 300 square yards with a covered area of 30.50 square meters was purchased in the name of Sangeeta Verma on 11.02.2015 shown to be for a consideration of Rs. 1,30,35,003/-. However, when Girish Verma raised a loan against the said plot, its value was estimated by Valuator of the Bank as Rs.2,30,00,000/-, which clearly shows that the sale consideration as reflected is undervalued. Still further, although the said plot measuring 300 square yards is virtually lying vacant and is being used as a lawn by accused, as Girish Verma has his house on the adjacent plot and it is only a small area, which is constructed in the said plot, but the said plot is shown to be fetching rent although Sangeeta Verma could not furnish complete details of any such tenant. 13. Apart from the above, it has also surfaced that 'M/s Sangeeta Verma & Sons' availed a loan of Rs.75 lakhs from OBC bearing account No.05327011000269. The said amount of Rs.75 lakhs was transferred into current account of 'Sangeeta Verma & Sons'. Another Rs.21 lakhs was received on 08.12.2007 into this account. Subsequently, pay order of Rs.95 lakhs was made and given to the seller of SCO-136, Sector-14, Panchkula. The said amount of Rs.75 lakhs was transferred into current account of 'Sangeeta Verma & Sons'. Another Rs.21 lakhs was received on 08.12.2007 into this account. Subsequently, pay order of Rs.95 lakhs was made and given to the seller of SCO-136, Sector-14, Panchkula. At the time of purchase, only commercial plot was purchased on which commercial building was constructed later, the details of which are as follow: 30.04.2008 - Approval of site plan 27.03.2009 - Completion for basement & ground floor 26.05.2009 - Completion for 1st & 2nd floor 14. From December, 2007 onwards, the accused started paying installments of above mentioned loan and during 2008-2009 spent approximately Rs.88 lakhs on the construction of commercial building. Sangeeta Verma has declared almost all of her rental income from this property except for nominal rent from mobile tower located at Village Lohgarh, Zirakpur, which means in comparison to her investment, she had negligible income. 15. As per record, the firm i.e. 'Sangeeta Verma & Sons' has no identity and has not done any business till date and this current account was only opened with the motive to show the credit entries received from various persons/entities as some business transactions. Details of money received by 'Sangeeta Verma & Sons' current account are as under: Sr. No. Name of creditor Date Amount 1. Prem Chand Bansal 21.04.2008 to 21.03.2009 35,00,000 2. Nirpal Singh 17.01.2009 9,00,000 3. B.R.Grover 03.02.2009 5,00,000 4. Naresh Gupta 30.06.2009 5,00,000 5. Bikramjit Singh Sandhu 01.10.2009 25,00,000 6. B.M.Sharma 30.10.2009 3,15,000 Total 82,15,000 Most of this money was used by 'Sangeeta Verma & Sons' in making loan repayments by transferring this money into the loan account. 16. Vikas Verma - petitioner in CRM-M-19075-2023 Vikas Verma has also claimed that he had initially obtained unsecured loans amounting to Rs.1,72,92,000/- from various friends between 2019 and 2021. However, no loan agreement was provided. The details of such unsecured loans are as under: Sr. No. Name Date & Amount Remarks 1. Pawan Kumar Sharma 22.05.2020 Rs.12,00,000/- He is a realtor doing his business in the area of Municipal Council, Zirakpur and has other financial transactions also including sale of land at Mansa to mother of the petitioner Sangeeta Verma. Moreover, Vikas Verma returned this amount on 04.08.2022 i.e. after initiation of enquiry against Girish Verma. 2. Pawan Kumar Sharma 22.05.2020 Rs.12,00,000/- He is a realtor doing his business in the area of Municipal Council, Zirakpur and has other financial transactions also including sale of land at Mansa to mother of the petitioner Sangeeta Verma. Moreover, Vikas Verma returned this amount on 04.08.2022 i.e. after initiation of enquiry against Girish Verma. 2. Sanjeev Kumar Gautam & Meena Gautam 22.03.2019 Rs.44,00,000/- She was contacted telephonically on 03.03.2023 & 06.03.2023 and asked to submit her statement to which she sought some more time citing her poor health. Meanwhile, Vikas Verma transferred Rs.20,00,000/- in her account on 09.03.2023, which clearly suggests influencing and alluring of a prime witness. 3. Hitanshi Mehta (sousin) August, 2020 Rs.2,92,000/- No information about the creditor and motive provided. However, this amount was returned in December, 2021 by Vikas Verma. 4. Sanjay Khanna October- December, 2020 Rs.49,00,000/- He is a realtor doing his business in the area of Municipal Council, Zirakpur. He is a partner in partnership firms alongwith above mentioned Pawan Kumar, who is an old accomplice of Girish Verma. Moreover, Vikas Verma returned this amount on 31.03.2022. 5. Gaurav Gupta 06.08.2020 Rs.15,00,000/- He is major partner in partnership with Vikas Verma in the firms Balajit Developers and Balaji Infra Buildtech. Vikas Verma returned this amount after initiation of enquiry against Girish Verma. 6. Ashu Goyal February, 2021 Rs.30,00,000/- He is a partner in partnership with Vikas Verma in the firm Balaji Developers. Vikas Verma returned this amount after initiation of enquiry against Girish Verma. 7. Aman Sharma 09/10.02.2021 Rs.10,00,000/- Vikas Verma returned this amount after initiation of enquiry against Girish Verma. 8. Amit Sharma 16.02.2021 Rs.10,00,000/- Vikas Verma returned this amount after initiation of enquiry against Girish Verma. 17. The income claimed by Vikas Verma in the face of unsecured loans cannot be attributed as the income from lawful sources. Instead these credit entries are taken as "white" money in exchange of unaccounted cash money provided by Girish Verma to the said creditors. 18. From the bank account details collected in respect of two firms, namely, M/s Balajit Infra Buildtech and M/s Balaji Developers, it is borne out that an amount of Rs. 1,44,00,000/- was received by Vikas Verma and an amount of Rs. 1,46,00,000/- was deposited by him in the said firms. 18. From the bank account details collected in respect of two firms, namely, M/s Balajit Infra Buildtech and M/s Balaji Developers, it is borne out that an amount of Rs. 1,44,00,000/- was received by Vikas Verma and an amount of Rs. 1,46,00,000/- was deposited by him in the said firms. The working of both these firms was also not free from suspicion inasmuch as M/s Balaji Infra Buildtech was initially registered on 16.04.2019 and was having 3 partners, namely, Sanjiv Kumar, Gaurav Gupta and Ashish Sharma and that later Vikas Verma was associated in place of Sanjiv Kumar as a partner on 01.10.2020. The said firm, thereafter, applied for regularization of unauthorized residential colony, namely, Balaji Homes in April, 2019 on the basis of a forged 'Agreement to Sell' dated 05.09.2015 regarding 2 acres of land. While in the said agreement, it is mentioned that total consideration of Rs.2 crores has been received by the seller from the purchaser, whereas it was in the year 2019 that the firm had started making payments to the landowners. Upon enquiry, it has been found that the stamp papers used to prepare 'Agreement to Sell' in respect of residential plots sought to be regularized was issued in the year 2019, whereas ante-dated 'Agreement to Sell' was prepared reflecting that the agreements were made in the year 2017. 19. Sanjiv Kumar & Gaurav Gupta - petitioners in CRM-M-20517-2023 & CRM-M-13367-2023 Sanjiv Kumar had been associated as a partner of the firm i.e. M/s Balaji Infra Buildtech on 16.04.2019 and although as per the partnership, the profits were to be shared by the partners, but despite land worth crores of rupees having been purchased during the Sanjiv Kumar's stint as major partner, he did not take any profit at the time of his resignation and only received amount equal to his total capital investment in the period of 6 months that he remained as a partner. On the other hand, when Vikas Verma was inducted as a partner in M/s Balaji Developers vide partnership deed dated 24.07.2020, there are entries of huge amounts in his account coming from M/s Balaji Infra Buildtech and were credited into M/s Balaji Developers. The following flow chart regarding some of the transactions will furnish sufficient indication regarding modus operandi: 20. On the other hand, when Vikas Verma was inducted as a partner in M/s Balaji Developers vide partnership deed dated 24.07.2020, there are entries of huge amounts in his account coming from M/s Balaji Infra Buildtech and were credited into M/s Balaji Developers. The following flow chart regarding some of the transactions will furnish sufficient indication regarding modus operandi: 20. During investigation, it has surfaced that Gaurav Gupta has remained elected Municipal Councillor in the Municipal Council of Kurali and Ashu Goyal has been into business of Real Estate at Kharar and Kurali and Girish Verma has remained posted as Estate Officer at Kharar and Kurali. Due to breakout of Covid-19 pandemic complete lockdown was implemented on 21.03.2020 and complete/partial lockdown was continued for almost the following year, which severely affected private businesses/jobs all over India. However, surprisingly, during these uncertain times Vikas Verma entered as a partner in real estate developer firm Balaji Developers on 24.07.2020 and in another firm Balaji Infra Buildtech on 01.10.2020. Subsequently, a new fact has surfaced during investigation that Balaji Infra Buildtech firm was utilized to show income/salary of Hardik @ Davian Verma younger son of Girish Verma and surprisingly he has been shown to have received salary for the period commencing from March, 2020 till October, 2021, whereas complete lockdown was implemented on 21.03.2020 due to breakout of Covid-19 pandemic. 21. Further, land worth crores of rupees was purchased in the name of aforesaid firms and lakhs of unaccounted cash money are found to be deposited in the bank accounts of the land sellers. Almost all of the capital investment made by Vikas Verma in these firms was provided to him by accomplices of his father-Girish Verma, namely, Pawan Kumar Sharma, Sanjeev Khanna, Aman Sharma, Amit Sharma, Ashu Goyal and Gaurav Gupta. 22. Thus, the aforesaid instances are indicative of the fact that both these petitioners i.e. Sanjiv Kumar and Gaurav Gupta have played an active role in helping Girish Verma to channelize his wealth earned by dubious means by showing the same to have been earned by legitimate means, whereas in fact he had accumulated the same by questionable means. 23. 22. Thus, the aforesaid instances are indicative of the fact that both these petitioners i.e. Sanjiv Kumar and Gaurav Gupta have played an active role in helping Girish Verma to channelize his wealth earned by dubious means by showing the same to have been earned by legitimate means, whereas in fact he had accumulated the same by questionable means. 23. The aforesaid discussion, thus, gives a conspectus of the case and clearly shows that while the main accused Girish Verma was amassing wealth misusing his position, the other co-accused were helping him in showing such unaccounted wealth as business profits or as unsecured loans with the help of which the principal accused Girish Verma purchased several properties either in his name or in the names of other members of his family. The details of 21 properties purchased by Girish Verma and his family members during the check period are as under: Sr. No. Property Owner 1. Residential Plot No.431, Sector-12, Panchkula (300 sq. yds.) Girish Verma & Sangeeta Verma 2. Construction of House at Plot No.431, Sector-12, Panchkula (300 sq. yards) Girish Verma 3. Land at Village - Lohgarh, Tehsil Zirakpur (Plot 250 sq. yds.) Sangeeta Verma 4. SCO-136, Sector-14, Panchkula (317.625 sq. meter) Sangeeta Verma 5. Construction of SCO-136, Sector-14, Panchkula Sangeeta Verma 6. B-4, 2047/1, Chaura Bazar, Ludhiana Sangeeta Verma (1/4* share) 7. Residential Plot No.21, WWRW Society, Block-B, Kansal, SAS Nagar Sangeeta Verma 8. Residential Plot No.432, Sector-12, Panchkula (300 sq. yds.) Sangeeta Verma 9. 19 Kanal 16 Marla land, Village - Khudal Kalan, Mansa Sangeeta Verma 10. 19 Kanal 16 Marla land, Village Khudal Kalan, Mansa Sangeeta Verma 11. Showroom No.25, Ground Floor, Sushma Imperial, Zirakpur Sangeeta Verma 12. Showroom No.26, Ground Floor, Sushma Imperial, Zirakpur Vikas Verma 13. Commercial Plot No.14, U.S.Estate, Dhakoli, Zirakpur (150 sq. yds.) Sangeeta Verma 14. Commercial Plot No.15, U.S.Estate, Dhakoli, Zirakpur (150 sq. yds.) Sangeeta Verma 15. Commercial Plot No.16, U.S.Estate, Dhakoli, Zirakpur (142.50 sq. yds.) Vikas Verma 16. Commercial Plot No.17, U.S.Estate, Dhakoli, Zirakpur (142.50 sq. yds.) Vikas Verma 17. Residential Colony, namely, Balajit Homes developed on 2 acres of land at Kharar by Balaji Infra Buildtech Vikas Verma (20% partner) 18. Residential Colony, namely, Balaji Homes-II developed on 10 acres of land at Kurali by Balaji Developers Vikas Verma (35% partner) 19. Mercedes SUV PB-65-AR-5610 Balaji Infra Buildtech 20. Swift Car HR-01-T-0031 Girish Verma 21. yds.) Vikas Verma 17. Residential Colony, namely, Balajit Homes developed on 2 acres of land at Kharar by Balaji Infra Buildtech Vikas Verma (20% partner) 18. Residential Colony, namely, Balaji Homes-II developed on 10 acres of land at Kurali by Balaji Developers Vikas Verma (35% partner) 19. Mercedes SUV PB-65-AR-5610 Balaji Infra Buildtech 20. Swift Car HR-01-T-0031 Girish Verma 21. Car CH-01-BX-0031 Vikas Verma Although the aforesaid facts would not make out any special case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, but having regard to the fact that petitioner - Sangeeta Verma is a lady, aged about 52 years and has already joined investigation, a lenient view can be taken in her case. As such, while the petitions filed on behalf of petitioners, namely, Vikas Verma, Sanjiv Kumar & Gaurav Gupta i.e. CRM-M-19075-2023, CRM-M-20517-2023 & CRM-M-13367-2023 respectively are dismissed, the petition filed on behalf of petitioner - Sangeeta Verma i.e. CRM-M-17544-2023 is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 13.04.2023 are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that she keeps on associating with the investigation and fully cooperates with the same and disclose all the requisite information, as is required by the Investigating Agency. The interim directions issued qua petitioners, namely, Gaurav Gupta and Sanjiv Kumar vide orders dated 16.03.2023 and 25.04.2023 stand vacated. 25. A photocopy of this order be placed on all the connected files.