CRM-M No. 11656 of 2011 **** Kalawati vs. State of Haryana Present: Mr. Hitesh Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Shalini Attri, DAG, Haryana. **** On 28.04.2011 the following order was passed:- “ This petition has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case F.I.R. No. 25 dated 09.11.2009 registered under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station State Vigilance Bureau Gurgaon, District Gurgaon. On 21.04.2011 the following contention was noticed:- “Learned counsel has stated that the allegations against the petitioner, as found by the police are that she had, in connivance with the Panchayat Secretary, embezzled the amount of approximately ` 55,000/- out of NREGA funds. Learned counsel says that without admitting the guilt the petitioner she is ready to deposit the said amount and co-operate with the police because actually the petitioner can account for every penny if given a chance.” Learned Deputy Advocate General has argued that this is a very serious case where the petitioner has been accused of misusing of funds meant for poorest of poor. However, keeping in mind the assertion of learned counsel for the petitioner I deem it appropriate to grant the concession of interim bail to the petitioner with a direction that she should appear before the investigating officer. Ordered accordingly. Petitioner is directed to appear before the investigating CRM-M No. 11656 of 2011 -2- officer on 11.05.2011 between 10.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. and later on as and when required and give information about account of every penny and to show him all the records. Adjourned to 31.05.2011.” On 31.05.2011 at the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, the case was adjourned for today. Even today learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner was not able to make the necessary deposit. He has, however, offered that in case the necessary deposit is not made within one week and the petitioner does not appear before the investigating officer along with the receipt, this bail petition be deemed to have been dismissed. Learned DAG has stated that though the conduct of the petitioner does not entitle her to such concession, yet she would not objection to this last course of action. In case the petitioner appears before the investigating officer on 10.06.2011 between 10.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. and on any other date which he may require, along with the receipt of deposit, he shall admit her to bail to his satisfaction. In case the petitioner does not so appear it would be deemed that this petition is dismissed without future reference to the Court and the petitioner shall be liable for arrest. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE June 02, 2011 sunita