Case of civil nature

Accused had allegedly returned a portion of amount to complainant and Trial Court would decide about application of S.406, P.P.C., according to facts and circumstances of the case after recording of evidence

Accused had joined investigation and there were two versions one put forth by complainant and the other by accused

Deeper appreciation of evidence was not warranted at bail stage and it was Trial Court to decide or pass any verdict that which was the correct version and the same required evidence

Complainant never gave any amount to accused, rather there was business bargain of "Ghee" inter se the complainant and accused for distribution purposes, which was based on profit

Matter was prima facie of civil nature and registration of case was an attempt to exert pressure upon accused to gain benefits

Pre-arrest bail was allowed in circumstances.

Complainant alleged that his sister entrusted 291 Tolas of gold and Rs.56,00,000 to accused lady who had misappropriated the same

Validity

Sister of complainant was star witness of the case who since lodging of F.I.R. did not approach investigating agency or any other forum so as to support stance taken up by complainant, who happened to be her real brother

Issue, if any, between complainant and accused party was that of civil liability/contract

Offences levelled against accused did not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of S. 497 Cr.P.C.

Accused was mother of a suckling baby aged one year and two months confined with her in jail

Case lodged against accused fell within the ambit of further inquiry as no exceptional ground was made out by prosecution so as to deny accused her liberty, as she had been behind the bars since 13-10-2012 i.e. approximately seven months and there was no likelihood of conclusion of trial in near future

Bail was allowed in circumstances.