Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.B. SNEHALATHA, J
MURSHAD K M – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application process and nature of the charges. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments from both sides regarding the accusations. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observation on evidentiary findings. (Para 5) |
| 4. court decision based on the nature of the offenses. (Para 6) |
ORDER
The bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 .
2. The prosecution case is that, by promising a job as General Manager in Travancore Soils and Fibre Industries Co-operative Society, the 1st accused lured the defacto complainant, her husband and another lady named Athira to part with an amount of Rs. 14,50,000/-. After collecting the amount accused neither provided the job nor returned the amount collected from them and thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 406 and
420 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the 1st accused contended that, the petitioner/A1 is innocent; that he was falsely implicated; that A1 has not offered any job or collected any amount from the defacto complainant, her husband or from one Athira as alleged.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand submitted that, the 1st accused collected an amount of Rs.12,0
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
