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

2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 13764

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Ankit @ Pintoo Kesharwani – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 55475/2022



Advocates:
Rakesh Kumar Kesharwani,Advocate General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT th ON THE 5 OF DECEMBER, 2022 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 55475 of 2022 BETWEEN:-

1. ANKIT @ PINTOO KESHARWANI S/O SHRI VIJAY KESHARWANI, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESSMAN AZAD WARD TEHSIL GOTEGAON DISTRICT NARSINGHPUR POLICE STATION GOTEGAON (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. VAIBHAV KESHARWANI S/O SHRI VIJAY KESHARWANI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESSMAN R/O AZAD WARD TEHSIL GOTEGAON DISTRICT NARSINGHPUR POLICE STATION GOTEGAON (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONERS (BY SHRI R.K. KESHARWANI, ADVOCATE)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH P.S.

GOTEGAON NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI A.R. BAIN, DY. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

This is repeat bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC on behalf of applicant in connection with Crime No.668/2022, registered at Police Station gotegaon, District Narsinghpur (M.P.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420/34 of IPC.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMITABH Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submitted that applicants are treader of crops. It is submitted that applicant had purchased Moong Daal from five persons. They have made part payment rest of the payment is to be made by applicants, for said transaction applicants have issued some cheque and said cheques were bounced as signature of applicants does not matched with the signature on cheque. It submitted that transaction done by applicant was purely civil in nature. There was no criminal intention or mens rea on the part of applicants. Applicants also want to pay back the money.

Learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent/State opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submitted that applicants have done cheating.

Considering the same, application may be dismissed.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the nature of transaction, which has taken place between applicant and complainant party, application is allowed.

It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Final decision regarding defalcated amount shall be taken by the trial court at the time of final judgment.

The applicant shall abide by the conditions enumerated under Section

437(3) of Cr.P.C. C.C as per rules.

(VISHAL DHAGAT)

JUDGE Amitabh Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMITABH Signature Not Verified

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 Back to top