Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13775 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38990 of 2024 Applicant :- Rakhi Goyal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Mishra,Vimlendu Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. 2.The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.663 of 2023, under Sections 420, 406, 506, 120B of I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District- Bulandshahr, during the pendency of the trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. On 19.02.2020 and 27.02.2020, two sale deeds were executed by the co-accused, Liyaqat Ali. The sale consideration was also transferred in the account of the co-accused, Liyaqat Ali. The amount of Rs. 30 lakhs was transferred in the bank account of the informant and his brother by the co-accused, Sudhir Kumar Goyal. The applicant being the wife of the co-accused, Sudhir Kumar Goyal has been implicated in the instant case. The co-accused, Jai Singh has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 15.10.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24709 of 2024 (Jai Singh vs. State of U.P.). It is next contended that no amount has been credited in the account of the applicant. The applicant was not a beneficiary of the illicit transaction. Vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. It is further contended that the offence alleged are triable by Magistrate of First Class with maximum punishment of seven years. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para no. 15 of the bail application and para no. 4 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is a lady and is in jail since 16.12.2023, and in case, she is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the sale consideration was transferred in the account of the co-accused, Liyaqat Ali. The amount of Rs. 30 lakhs was transferred to the bank account of the informant and his brother by the co-accused, Sudhir Kumar Goyal. The co-accused, Jai Singh has been granted bail by this Court. Vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. Further, the offence alleged are triable by Magistrate of First Class. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than one year and one month, and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant Rakhi Goyal, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that she: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iv) shall not leave the country without the leave of the court concerned/trial court. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 Sachin Mishra Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad