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

2022 Supreme(All) 1095

SUBHASH VIDYARTHI
Shefali Kaul – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant : Katyayini
For the Respondents: Anuj Srivastava.

JUDGMENT :

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

1. Heard Ms. Katyayni and Sri Pankaj Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned Additional Government Advocate, Sri Syed Imran Ibrahim, the learned counsel for the accused - respondents and perused the record.

2. The present application has been filed seeking cancellation of the order dated 21.10.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Mathura in Bail Application No. 2832 of 2020 whereby the accused – respondent nos. 2 to 7 have been granted bail in Case Crime No.312 of 2020, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 120-B IPC, Police Station-Nauhjheel, District Mathura.

3. The aforesaid order states that the accused persons were produced before the Court from jail and they had given an application stating that they had taken the money in question from the applicant in the year 2016; that they had entered into a settlement/MOU with the informant; that they had paid a sum of Rs. 40 lacs only to the informant in part performance of the settlement and they had issued post dated cheques to the informant in respect of the balance amount and they further stated that they would follow the term

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