SAT PAL
SUNIL SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
( 2 ) IN this case at the instance of the wife Smt. Sunita Sharma, a case was registered under Sections 406/498a, I. P. C. at P. S. Anand Parvat against the petitioners. The petitioners approached the Sessions Court for grant of anticipatory bail and a learned Additional Sessions Judge, by his order dated 20/03/1993 directed the petitioners to deposit Rs. 10,000/- each in a nationalised bank in the name of the trial Court within one week and directed that on such deposit, in the event of arrest, petitioners will be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- with a surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the IO/sho.
( 3 ) MR. Shambhu Nath, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the condition for deposit of Rs. 10,000/- each in the shape of FDR imposed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge was contrary to law. He submitted that the proceedings under Section 406/498a, IPC are not meant for the recovery of the jewellery or other articles of dowry. In support of his
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.