Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Renuka Yara
Sanjay Kumar Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
State represented by Inspector of Police – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts regarding the alleged criminal offense and background of loan transaction. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments addressing the distinction between civil and criminal liability. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 19) |
| 3. need for trial to establish prima facie case regarding intent and actions. (Para 23 , 28) |
| 4. final ruling dismissing the revision based on established prima facie case. (Para 29) |
ORDER :
Renuka Yara, J.
Heard Sri G. Ashok Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri T. Srujan Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the CBI/respondent.
2. The present criminal revision case is preferred by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 4 aggrieved by the order dated 30.08.2024 passed by the learned XXI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum- Special Judicial Magistrate First Class for trial of CBI Cases, Hyderabad, (‘CBI Court’), in Crl.M.P.No.403 of 2018 in C.C.No.23 of 2018 (Old Crl.M.P.No.189 of 2014 in old C.C.No.77 of 2013), wherein petition for discharge of accused Nos.1 and 4 from the offences under Sections 120-B read with 409, 420, 471 read with 468 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘ IPC ’) was dismissed.
3. The brief facts of the case are that a criminal case was regis
The court will not discharge accused when a prima facie case exists for criminal charges, requiring trial to establish intent and responsibility.
The court ruled that prima facie evidence supports the allegations against the petitioner, affirming that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised cautiously and not for merit as....
The court affirmed the distinction between criminal breach of trust and cheating, emphasizing that both offenses cannot coexist under the same facts while confirming the accused's conviction for forg....
The court ruled that the trial court properly dismissed the discharge application, finding sufficient evidence to frame charges against the accused for financial fraud.
The ingredients of the offenses under Sections 405/406/420 IPC are prima facie present in the case, as there was evidence of entrustment of the jewelry, dishonest intention at the time of the transac....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
