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

2013 Supreme(Ker) 363

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
Ashish Arora – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Rajit, Advocate.
For the Respondent: T. Asaf Ali, Director General of Prosecution.

ORDER

Petitioners, two in number, who are common in all the petitions, seek their enlargement on bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for short the Code, in three crime cases registered at different Police Stations. In the above crimes, all of them, accused persons, six in number, in common, are proceeded for offences punishable under sections 120B,417, 468, 471 and 420 read with section 34 IPC and Sections 65, 66C and 66D of Information Technology Act. Petitioners are arrayed as fourth and fifth accused among the accused in all the crimes. The gist of accusation in the crimes, based on complaints separately filed by respective Manager of a Scheduled Bank,  2 namely, Federal Bank, is that accused using fake and forged ATM cards fradulently withdrew large sum of cash from the accounts of bank through several ATM centres.

2. Against the accused in the three crimes, all of them, concededly, several crimes have been registered in the State and also in some other States on similar allegations imputed as referred to above. A detailed narration of the allegations imputed against the accused in common, or of petitioners proceeded as fourth and fifth accused, is not warr

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