Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.B. PARDIWALA, K.V. VISWANATHAN, JJ
RITIK MANDILWAR @ BAMFOD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail is granted based on judicial review and argument presented. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the charges are triable by a magistrate. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. conditions for bail may be imposed by the trial court. (Para 5) |
| 4. the appeal succeeds and the high court's order is set aside. (Para 6 , 8) |
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard Mr.Sameer Shrivastava, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, and Mr. Apoorv Shukla, the learned counsel appearing for the State of Chhattisgarh.
3. The High Court has denied regular bail to the appellant in connection with Crime No.325 of 2024 registered with Ambikapur Police Station, District Surguja for the offence punishable under Sections 420 , 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the IPC”), Sections 7 and 8, respectively of the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022, and Sections 66-C and 66-D of the Information Technology Act , 2000, respectively.
4. The appellant seems to be in judicial custody since May 2025. We take notice of the fact that all the offences stated in the FIR are Magistrate triable.
5. In view of the aforesaid, we order that the appellant be released on bail subject to terms and conditions that the
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
