SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 1946

K.T.THOMAS, R.P.SETHI
CHAKRAWARTI PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


( 1 ). Leave granted.

( 2 ) WE were not initially inclined to interfere with the order passed by the high Court because it was passed in the discretion of the High Court. But Dr rajeev Dhavan, learned Senior Counsel, under instructions, submitted that the appellant would deposit the amount of electricity charges of, the power alleged to have been pilfered. Mr B. B. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent worked it out to be more than a crore of rupees. We are not at present interested in fixing up as to the precise amount due from the appellant. If the charges of electricity alleged to have been pilfered can be worked out even for a period of six months, it may even cross the figure of 40 lakhs of rupees, according to the counsel. Dr Rajeev Dhavan pointed out that the appellant has already remitted Rs 20 lakhs pursuant to the order passed by the High Court.

( 3 ) CONSIDERING all aspects we think that anticipatory bail can be granted to the appellant on a condition that he should remit a sum of Rs 21 lakhs within a period of six months. If he remits one-third of that amount within one month from today he shall be released on bail. We permit him to surrender before the court concer

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top