Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ashwani Singh Parihar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 July, 2019

                                  1       M.Cr.C. No. 29536/2019

            THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     M.Cr.C. No.29536/2019
                (Ashwani Singh Parihar Vs. State of M.P.)

Gwalior, Dated 19.07.2019

       Shri H.S. Rana, learned counsel for the petitioner.

       Shri R.S. Gurjar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Case-diary is available.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. This is 2nd repeat bail application u/S. 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for grant of bail after dismissal of earlier one as withdrawn without being considered on merits.

Petitioner has been arrested on 13.12.2018 by Police Station City Kotwali District Bhind (M.P.) in connection with Crime No. 522/2018 registered in relation to the offences punishable u/S. 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and 66-C and 66-D of I.T. Act.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out.

Petitioner is alleged with cheating and forgery alongwith offences punishable u/S. 66-C, 66-D of I.T. Act with the allegation that he alongwith other co-accused have withdrawn Rs. 1,60,000/- by preparing a clone ATM card.

Petitioner relies upon the order of bail granted to co-accused Ashwini Singh in another offence of similar nature passed on 18.02.2019 in M.Cr.C. No. 6268/2019.

2 M.Cr.C. No. 29536/2019

A bare perusal of aforesaid order dated 18.02.2019 reveals that the offence of forgery was not alleged in that case and offence was triable by Magistrate whereas in the present case is triable by Sessions Court and thus assumes seriousness.

Mobile phone recovered from the petitioner contains certain illicit material which was being used for making clone ATM cards.

Considering the aforesaid, petitioner appears to be main accused and therefore, this court declines bail to the petitioner and rejects the same with liberty to come again after examination of main witnesses or if the trial gets further delayed, whichever is earlier.

(Sheel Nagu) Judge ojha YOGENDRA OJHA 2019.07.19 18:55:50 -07'00'