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

2005 Supreme(Chh) 17

K.SHRIVASTAVA
RAJESH SAHU APPLICANT – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Panel Lawyer, Prashant Jayaswal, RAJ KUMAR GUPTA, SANJEEV KUMAR AGRAWAL

V. K. SHRIVASTAVA, J, J.

( 1 ) HEARD.

( 2 ) THE accused! applicant has preferred this bail application under Section 438 of the Cr. P. C. , apprehending arrest in Crime No. 110/2004 registered at Police Chowky- Vishrampuri, PS Keshkal, Bastar, (CG) for commission of the offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC, for releasing him on anti-cipatory bail.

( 3 ) IT is alleged that the applicant obtained Rs. 1,650i- from Shri B. R. Kashyap alluring him that after one year he will get Rs. 20,000!- or a Motor cycle by Demonet Marketing and Retail Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. , but after lapse of 15 months, till now neither the amount nor the vehicle has been given to him. Con-tention of the applicant is that he is the authorized agent of Demonet Marketing and Retail Trading Company Pvt. Ltd, who after receiving the amount, has deposi-ted the same in the said company. There is nothing to show that Demonet Marke-ting and Retail Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. , is a fake one.

( 4 ) TAKING into account all the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case in which the applicant should be extended the benefit of Section 438 of the Cr. P. C. Therefore, the petition is allowed and



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