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 5, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Dani Nawal Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 17 August, 2019

Author: Anil Kshetarpal

Bench: Anil Kshetarpal

CRM-M-14918-2018 (O&M)                                                    -1-

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                                                  CRM-M-14918-2018 (O&M)
                                                  Date of decision : 17.08.2019

Dani Nawal Kumar @ Naval Kumar Dani

                                                                      ...Petitioner

                                         Versus

State of Haryana

                                                                    ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present:     Mr. Rajan Bhargava, Advocate for
             Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

             Mr. Manish Bansal, DAG, Haryana.

             Mr. Sumit Roy, Advocate for the complainant.

             ****

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. (ORAL)

Prayer is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.0179 dated 27.09.2017 registered under Sections 380, 403, 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66 of IT Act, 2000 at Police Station Sector-53, District Gurugram.

Allegations are that One Mobikwik is a mobile e-wallet company and due to glitch in their software, certain persons including the petitioner misused the aforesaid glitch and transferred the amount more than their entitlement.

As per the allegations, petitioner had transferred `16,11,000/- in excess of his entitlement. It is undisputed that during the pendency of the 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 25-08-2019 13:09:40 ::: CRM-M-14918-2018 (O&M) -2- present petition, out of `16,11,000/- wrongly transferred, `13,25,000/- has been refunded to the first informant-company.

Keeping in view the aforesaid fact, the interim protection granted to the petitioner on 08.05.2018 is made absolute.

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. As stated, the petitioner shall remain bound to return the admitted excess amount transferred within a period of 2 months.




17.08.2019                                     (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
Pawan                                                JUDGE


             Whether speaking/reasoned:-              Yes/No

             Whether reportable:-                     Yes/No




                                2 of 2
             ::: Downloaded on - 25-08-2019 13:09:40 :::