ARUN MISHRA, NAVIN SINHA
Central Bureau Of Investigation – Appellant
Versus
Nand Ram Shrilal Meena – Respondent
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties at length.
3. It is a case where the CBI has filed the chargesheet under Sections 7, 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 120B of IPC against the accused persons.
4. An application was filed for discharge under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. before the trial court. The Special Judge, CBI, in Special Case No. 8 of 2012 passed an order on 23.05.2014 rejecting the application for discharge. The High Court set aside the order and has observed that the telephonic conversation is vague and one-sided. Apart from that, the High Court has also observed that it was mentioned in the chargesheet that an amount of Rs.1,25,000/- was paid to the accused as bribe in the first week of December, 2008 through one Bhupendrasinh Padhiyar. Even if there was some reference of some transactions in the telephonic conversation, that is not conclusive to infer that the accused has demanded any amount as bribe. The telephonic conversation as to the amount was from one end.
5. It has also been observed by the High Court that the trial cannot be allowed to continue merely on the opinion of the Invest
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.