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

2025 Supreme(SC) 577

SUDHANSHU DHULIA, K. VINOD CHANDRAN
Vinay Aggarwal – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Shoeb Alam, Sr. Adv. Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR Ms. Shubhangi Pandey, Adv. Mr. Saday Mondol, Adv. Mr. Naveen Kumar, AOR Ms. Stuti Bisht, Adv. Mr. Nitesh Bhandari, Adv. Mr. Prabhat Kumar Rai, Adv. Mr. Aditya Goyal, Adv. Mr. Ujjawal Kumar Rai, Adv. Ms. Esha Kumar, Adv. Ms. Nidhi Singh, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Chandra, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Alok Sangwan, Sr. A.A.G. Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR Mr. Sumit Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rajat Sangwan, Adv. Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv. Mr. Shikhar Narwal, Adv. Mr. Aman Dev Sharma, Adv. Mr. Amit Ojha, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mittal, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Ms. Shreya Jain, Adv. Mr. Jagdish Chandra Solanki, Adv. Mr. Navin Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Miss Aanchal Jain, AOR Mr. Karan Dewan, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

SUDHANSHU DHULIA, J.

1. Permission to file SLP granted. Leave granted.

2. The facts taken into account in this order are from Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl) No.8403/2024 by considering it to be the lead matter. The appellant before this Court was made an accused in an FIR No.215/2022 at P.S Sector 20, Panchkula (Haryana) under Section 120B, 177, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 of IPC. This FIR has been lodged on the basis of information given by complainant-respondent no.3 (Jagbir Singh) where it has been alleged that the appellant impersonated himself as an Inspector General (IG) of Intelligence Bureau (IB) and threatened the complainant to transfer Rs.1,49,00,000 into the appellant’s account. As per this FIR, the complainant, who is in the business of pharmaceuticals, was coerced by the appellant to do business with the appellant’s associates and friends including one Dr. Komal Khanna (co-accused and appellant in criminal appeal arising out of Diary No.33284/2024) and money was extorted from the complainant’s firms by putting undue pressure on the complainant.

3. The FIR itself was filed on 29.10.2022. The complainant then filed a petition under Section 482 of the C

    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