1 ABA-335.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.335 OF 2011 {For Anticipatory Bail} Smt. Reema Vivek Iyer .... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent S/Shri Rajesh S. Sharma with Sunil B. Jadhav i/b Rajesh S. Sharma & Associates for the Applicant. Shri Y.M. Nakhwa, APP, for the State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: APRIL 28, 2011 P.C: 1. This is an application for anticipatory bail by an employee of one agency known as "Wins Immigration", run by Raj Verma. The first informant had parted with Rs.75,000/- on the promise that Raj Verma would secure an employment for the first informant in the United Kingdom. Thereafter Raj Verma told that the first informant would have to pass IELTS Examination conducted by the British Council for which necessary fee was deposited with the British Council. The applicant as the employee of Raj Verma was made to teach English. The 2 ABA-335.11 first informant passed the requisite examination. The job did not come through. Raj Verma gave a cheque of Rs.75,000/-, which bounced. The learned APP opposes the application on the ground that the applicant has not been able to furnish the address of Raj Verma as well as Nitin, who was the applicant's colleague. This cannot be a ground for denying bail to the applicant who was only an employee of Raj Verma and had not promised before the first informant parted with the money that she would secure any job for the first informant. In view of this, in the event of the applicant's arrest in C.R. No.95 of 2010 of Bangur Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, the applicant be released on bail on her furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the sum aggregating to Rs.25,000/- on the condition that the applicant shall report at the police station concerned on 5-5-2011 at 11:00 a.m. for interrogation and thereafter as and when required by the I.O.. The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and she shall not leave the 3 ABA-335.11 country without the prior permission of the trial Court. 2. This order shall remain in force till the trial is over with the only stipulation that if charge-sheeted, the applicant may furnish fresh bond before the trial Court in view of the Judgment of the Supreme Court, dated 2-12-2010, delivered in Criminal Appeal No.2271 of 2010, arising out of SLP (Cri.) No. 7615 of 2009 {Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.}. 3. The application accordingly stands disposed of. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)