Sheetla Sahai Vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47231

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8240 of 2024

Applicant :- Sheetla Sahai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Vishwakarma,Abhishek Pathak,Amrendra Nath Tripathi,Avneesh Kumar Rai,Harsh Vardhan Kediya,Nadeem Murtaza,Samidha,Shashank Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manish Vaish,Purnendu Chakravarty

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Shiv Kumar Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Satyendra Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Purnendu Chakravarty, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.509 of 2018, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by the complainant, who is working as officer on special duty in a private school, on 16.05.2018, against Sadhna Bedi @ Smt. Sadhna Chooramani and Sheetla Sahai (applicant), stating that co-accused Sadhna Bedi was working as a Principal of the School and in the year 2017 one Indrajeet Arora made a complaint to the school management that Sadhna Bedi was extracting money from the people in the name of the school and is not returning the same. She has projected that she was taking money for the school and the money would be returned with interest after one year and she had issued receipts in this regard. When inquiries were made from Sadhna Bedi,

¶9

she admitted her guilt and tendered her apology orally as well as in writing. In the F.I.R. it has also been alleged that upon making inquiry this fact also came to light that the applicant, who was working as a lab assistant in the school, was involved in commission of the aforesaid illegal acts done by co-accused Sadhna Bedi as she had prepared receipts for the money taken by the co-accused person and has maintained accounts for the same.

¶10

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and is languishing in jail since 22.06.2024. The applicant's involvement in three complaint cases has been disclosed in 5 of the supplementary affidavit in which the applicant has already been released on bail.

¶11

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant stating that the co-accused Sadhna Bedi had filed Anticipatory Bail Application No.2180 of 2024, which was dismissed by means of an order dated 21.09.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The co-accused Sadhna Bedi has filed SLP (Criminal) No.17268 of 2024 and an interim order has been passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in that SLP on 20.12.2024 staying her arrest in connection with the present case. The aforesaid SLP is still pending and the interim order passed thereon is still continuing.

¶12

The State has filed a counter affidavit opposing the bail application annexing therewith copies of materials collected during the investigation and a copy of the charge sheet dated 11.12.2018.

¶13

The complainant has also filed a counter affidavit opposing the bail application.

¶14

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that in the entire F.I.R., allegations are mainly directed against co-accused Sadhna Bedi and the allegation against the applicant is of having assisted in commission of the offence by Sadhna Bedi by preparing the sheets and accounts; that the co-accused Sadhna Bedi has been granted stay of arrest by the Hon'ble Supreme Court; that the investigation of the case has already stands concluded way back in the year 2018 and the applicant was not arrested during investigation; that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.06.2024 whereas the trial is yet to commence, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶15

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant- Sheetla Sahai be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶17

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶18

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶19

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court.

¶20

Order Date :- 12.8.2025 S. Shivhare

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sheetla Sahai v. State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheetla Sahai v. State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Lmt. Thru. Its Dir. Dhananjay Subramanium and 3 Others vs the Directorate of Enforcement (Ed) Deptt. of Revenue Thru. Direct. and 3 Others

Dev Kapoor vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Rakesh Pandey According to Prosecution But Actual Name Is Rakesh Kumar Pandey and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pankaj Kumar Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Warish Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Satyam Pathak vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.