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

DELHI HIGH COURT
MUKTA GUPTA
Bangaru Laxman – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Mukta Gupta, J.

1. The Petitioner is an accused before the learned Special Judge, CBI, Rohini in complaint case No.8/2009 under Sections 120B IPC read with Sections 7 and 9 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The allegations against the Petitioner are that he accepted illegal gratification from the journalists of tehelka.com posing as arms dealers. During the course of investigation on 21st March, 2005, Respondent No.2 herein Mr. T. Satyamurthy appeared before the learned Special Judge, CBI and prayed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The said prayer was not opposed by the CBI and Respondent No.2 was, thus, granted the relief of anticipatory bail. On 21st April, 2005, the Respondent No.2 appeared before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate and got his statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in the presence of the Investigating Officer. Before filing of the charge sheet on 3rd July, 2006, the CBI moved an application before the learned Special Judge, CBI seeking pardon for Respondent No.2, co-accused so as to make him a witness/approver in the case. Learned Special Judge on 17th July, 2006 allowed the said application of Respondent No.1/CBI under

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