R.K.RASTOGI, J. - (1.) IN this application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. to quash the further proceedings of Crl. Case No. 1434 of 2004 under Section 467, 468, 471 and 420, I.P.C., State v. Parminder Kaur, pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur, an application was moved on 1 -9 -2007 by Smt. Parminder Kaur for listing of the above case, in which a prayer was also made that at the time of grant of bail in the above case the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Rampur vide order dated 24 -12 -2003 had imposed condition upon her that she will give an undertaking that she would not go outside India during pendency of the criminal case against her and that she would deposit her passport within a period of seven days. It was stated in the application that her husband living in America is ill and so she has to go to America to look -after her ailing husband. It has also been suited that she is green card holder of America and this card is to be renewed by 15 -9 -2007. Therefore, she prayed that passport should be given to her and she should be permitted to leave the country for a period of three months.
(2.) HEARD learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of O.P. No. 2. Chequered history of the case has been described by the Hon'ble Apex Court in its judgment in Parminder Kaur v. Stale of Uttar Pradesh and Anr., 2007 CrLJ 1997 and I need not repeat it here. The applicant is the wife of elder brother of the complainant -O.P. No. 2. There is property dispute between these two parties and the allegation against the applicant is that she had committed some forgery in judicial record and so a F.I.R. was lodged against her by O.P. No. 2 and on that F.I.R. charge -sheet had been submitted by the police after investigation of the case under Sections 467, 468, 471 and 420, I.P.C. upon which cognizance was taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur. At the time of hearing of the bail application of the applicant, a plea was taken before the Additional Sessions Judge that since the allegations were regarding forgery in the judicial record, cognizance of the case was barred in the absence of complaint by the Court concerned in view of Section 195, Cr.P.C. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, prima facie agreeing with the above contention passed bail order in favour of the applicant ordering that she may be released on executing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/ - with two sureties of the like amount on giving an undertaking that she would not go outside India during pendency of the case and she would deposit her passport in Court within seven days. The applicant challenged this order by filing Crl. Misc. Application No. 4290 of 2004 in this Court and that application was disposed of by Hon'ble R.C. Deepak, J. vide his order dated 3 -6 -2004, relevant portion of which is as under : Under the facts and circumstances of the case the condition No. 1 imposed upon the applicant, to the effect that the applicant shall not leave India till the conclusion of the trial in the aforesaid case, shall remain suspended for a period of 2 months from today and the Pass Port of the applicant so deposited shall be released in her favour forthwith subject to her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/ -. With these observations the application is disposed of.
(3.) AFTER passing of the above order passport was given to the applicant and she went to America. She was scheduled to return back on 6 -8 -2004 on expiry of the period of two months. This period was, however, extended by three weeks. The extended period also expired on 27 -8 -2004. On this date also she did not appear and did not deposit her passport and then O.P. No. 2 moved an application for taking action against her. This application was disposed of by Hon'ble R.C. Deepak, J. on 23 -11 -2004 with the following observations : The present application has been moved on behalf of the opposite party with a prayer that the above named, applicant has flouted the order of this Court. She be directed to deposit the pass port and necessary orders be also passed. Since the applicant is an old and ailing lady of 75 years' age, it appears that under some misunderstanding, she could not deposit the pass port. So I am not inclined to pass any adverse order against her. She is directed to deposit the pass port in the trial Court within a week from today. With these observations, the modification application is disposed of.;