Mamta Devi vs State Of Jharkhand

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the

stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over.

In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Satbarwa P.S. Case No.105 of 2019 registered under sections 419/409/420 of

the Indian Penal Code.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner who was working as a coordinator of

Saraswati Vahini Mata Committee of upgraded middle school, Sinduriya in connivance with the co-accused persons has committed criminal breach of

trust by misappropriating Rs.12,87,200/- during the period of 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2018. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner

are all false and the co-accused- president of the committee has stated before the enquiry committee that he withdrew the amount but being an

illiterate person, gave the said withdrawn money to the petitioner and her husband. It is next submitted that the petitioner is a female. It is next

submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for a considerable period of time. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that she in connivance with the co- accused persons has

misappropriated huge amount of Government money and in view of documentary evidence in the record; there is every chance of the petitioner

absconding, if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be admitted to bail.

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of misappropriating huge amount of Government money, this Court is of the

considered view that this is not a fit case where the above named petitioner be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named

petitioner is rejected.

Keeping in view the period of custody undergone by the petitioner and the serious nature of offences involved in this case, notwithstanding any order

in administrative side of this Court, the trial court is directed to take up the trial of the case expeditiously and to conclude the trial within six months

from the date of receipt of this order by the trial court. It is made clear that the trial be conducted and witnesses be examined by observing the

precautions relating to COVID -19 Pandemic.