DINESH MAHESHWARI, BELA M. TRIVEDI
Udho Thakur – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
ORDER
Leave granted.
2 . At the outset, learned counsel for the State has frankly referred to the order dated 24.08.2022 passed by a co-ordinate Bench, disapproving the propositions adopted in several orders by the High Court, imposing the terms of payment for the purpose of granting the relief of pre-arrest bail and remitting the matter for re-consideration with several observations.
3. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, we felt inclined to pass similar order in the present matter too, where the High Court has proceeded to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail to the appellants on the condition of their furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- and also depositing a demand draft in the sum of Rs.7,50,000/- as an ad-interim victim compensation. However, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 has submitted that the expression “victim compensation” as used in the impugned order may not be apt for the reason that it was not a case of recovery of victim compensation but, otherwise, the condition cannot be said to be unjustified or onerous because receiving of the said sum of Rs. 7,50,000/- by the appellants at the time of marriage has not been a fact in dispute.
4. Even
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.