Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (2.37 seconds)

Vaman Narain Ghiya vs State Of Rajasthan on 12 December, 2008

The present case is not one of money laundering. It is a simple cheque bounce case and the amount of default would not be a relevant consideration. The impugned order is legal and in accordance with law and it deserves to be upheld. Reliance is placed upon 'Vaman Narain Ghiya Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2009(1) RCR (Criminal) 473', 'State of Punjab Vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar and others, 2012(1) RCR (Criminal) 126', 'State Rep. by D.S.P, S.B. C.I.D., Chennai Vs. K.V. Rajendran and others, 2008(4) RCR (Criminal), 278' and 'Satya Narayan Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2001(4) RCR (Criminal) 377.'
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 113 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Pritpal Singh Alias Bitta vs State Of Punjab And Another on 25 November, 2011

Terms as to bail bonds and sureties can be imposed by the Court, but no condition can be imposed as the same would amount to curtailing the statutory right under Section 436 Cr.P.C. The judgment of this Court in Pritpal Singh's case (supra), cannot apply to the facts of this case as in the said case the accused person did not appear before the trial Court on a particular date of hearing resulting in cancellation of his bail and surety bonds. Thereafter, when the accused person was brought before the Court while granting bail condition of deposit of passport was imposed.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 42 - Cited by 11 - Full Document
1