Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Manipur · body

2025 DAILYLAW 1861 (MAN)

Tonanbam Henarita Devi v. Officer in Charge Lamphel Police Station

MC(Bail Appln.)/6/2025 · 2025-09-08

A Guneshwar Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

BAIL APPLN. No. 19 of 2025 & MC(Bail Appln.) No. 6 of 2025 Item Nos. 82-83 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL BAIL APPLN. No. 19 of 2025 Tonambam Henarita Devi. …Petitioner - Versus - Officer in charge, Lamphel Police Station. …Respondent With MC(Bail Appln.) No. 6 of 2025 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA O R D E R 09-09-2025 [1] Present Mr. Ch. Ngongo, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. S. Gangarani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Y. Ashang, learned PP assisted by Mrs. R.K. Emily, learned Dy. Government Advocate on behalf of the State respondents. [2] The petitioner filed MC(Bail Appln.) No. 6 of 2025 for filing an additional affidavit, i.e. a copy of the charge sheet (Annexure K/1). It is submitted that the charge sheet will be necessary for proper disposal of the present case. [3] Mr. Y. Ashang, learned PP for the State respondents, submits that this Court may pass an appropriate order in the facts of the present case. [4] Accordingly, MC(Bail Appln.) No. 6 of 2025 is allowed and disposed of. [5] Charge sheet is taken on record. [6] The petitioner is an accused in FIR No. 129(4)2025 Lamphel Police Station under Sections 238/316(4)/316(5) & 318(2) of BNS. She is NINGOM BAM VICTORIA Digitally signed by NINGOMBAM VICTORIA Date: 2025.09.10 14:30:33 +05'30' BAIL APPLN. No. 19 of 2025 & MC(Bail Appln.) No. 6 of 2025 working as Cashier-cum-Accountant in the private school, i.e. Shishu Nistha Niketan, Kwakeithel Mayaikoibi, Imphal West and she is alleged to have been misappropriated a sum of Rs. 24,82,200/- while she was working as Cashier-cum-Accountant in the said school. She was arrested on 20-04- 2025 and since then, she has been in judicial custody and her bail applications were rejected first by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Imphal West and later on by the learned Sessions Judge, Imphal West. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court for releasing on bail. It is submitted that the charge sheet has already been submitted before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Imphal West and since investigation has already been completed and charge sheet having been filed before the competent court, further custody of the petitioner is not warranted. [7] Mr. Ch. Ngongo, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is the mother of two minor children and the children are facing difficulty in the absence of the mother. It is submitted that the petitioner may be released on bail and she will abide by all the conditions imposed by this Court. [8] On the other hand, Mr. Y. Ashang, learned PP for the State respondents, submits that the petitioner has been involved in misappropriation of Rs. 24,82,200/- which is under her custody and since she is working in the school, there is a likelihood of tampering the evidence if she is released on bail. [9] Mr. Ch. Ngongo, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, submits that since all the relevant documents have already been submitted before the competent Court, there is no likelihood of possibility of tampering with such documents in the custody of the Court. BAIL APPLN. No. 19 of 2025 & MC(Bail Appln.) No. 6 of 2025 [10] This Court has considered the material on record. Even though the petitioner is involved in misappropriation of a sum of around Rs. 24,82,200/- but considering the fact that the charge sheet has already been submitted and she is in custody for more than 5 months and having two minor children, this Court deems it proper that the bail application is allowed. The petitioner is released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 1 lakh with two sureties (Government employees — one Gazetted) of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Imphal West with the conditions that:— i) She will appear before the Court on the date fixed for it unless exempted by the competent Court ii) She shall not try to influence any person acquainted with the facts of the present case. iii) She shall not leave the State of Manipur without the leave of the trial Court. iv) If she is still working in Shishu Nistha Niketan, Kwakeithel Mayaikoibi, Imphal West, she shall not be posted in account section. If any condition is violated, the State has liberty to approach this Court for cancellation of the bail. [11] With this observation, the bail application is allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Victoria