Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ASHOK KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


ASHOK KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA - CRM-7521-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 302 (23 January 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

CRL. MISC. NO. 7521-M OF 2006

DATE OF DECISION: 15.2.2006

ASHOK KUMAR

...PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA

...RESPONDENT

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
PRESENT: Mr J.K. Goel, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Mr Sidharth Sarup, AAG, Haryana.

-----

ORDER:

Heard.

Offence alleged is under section 39 of the Electricity Act and section 379 IPC.

The petitioner has been arrested on an allegation that he had taken a factory on lease and on a raid being organized, theft of electricity was detected. The petitioner had manipulated the meter by a PVC wire of which photographs were taken and this resulted in loss of Rs.14 lacs to the Electricity Department. The trial court granted bail subject to the petitioner depositing 40% of the amount.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is already in custody for the last more than one month and will face proceedings in accordance with law; his indefinite custody is not called for.

It is further stated that the petitioner will deposit a sum of Rs. two lacs within one month of his release without prejudice to his rights and contentions and the amount will be deposited in the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kaithal. It is further stated that the petitioner will furnish security for the assessed amount i.e., Rs.14 lacs in the first instance, which will be treated as security for the remaining amount after the amount of Rs. two lacs is deposited. The security will be in the form of immovable property of the petitioner or any one else to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kaithal. The deposit and security will abide by result of legal proceedings. The amount will be kept in a fixed deposit initially for a period of one year. If the petitioner succeeds in legal proceedings, the amount will be refunded to him and security will be discharged and if the petitioner loses, the amount will become available to comply with any order.

In view of above, without expressing any opinion on merits, the petitioner is granted bail to the satisfaction of CJM/ Duty Magistrate, Kaithal.

The petition is disposed of.

February 15, 2006 ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL )

sanjeev JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.