RAJEEV KUMAR GUPTA @ DIMPLE KUMAR v. STATE OF BIHAR THRU.CBI,A.C.B.I, A.C.B. PATNA
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SHAILESH KUMAR SINHA
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 120B, 420
- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ss. 13(1)(d), 13(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Judgment
arising out of R.C. No. 15(A) of 2003. The allegation is to the effect that the petitioners along with other accused persons including the officials of the postal department booked a good number of V.P.L. and received illegal payments of large number of V.P.M.O.S. without fulfilling the promise made in the advertisement published in the newspaper. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that during investigation no material could be collected - 2 - with regard to the allegation of utilizing fake postal stamps. It is further submitted that the only allegation against the petitioners is that they did not submitted the application in the prescribed format. It is further contended that the co-accused having similar allegations have been allowed anticipatory bail by this Court as per the order contained in Annexure-3 to the petition. Learned standing counsel appearing for the central Investigation Bureau (C.B.I.) submits that the offence committed by the petitioners is serious in nature. Having considered the submissions, as noticed above, and in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from today, the petitioners, namely, Rajeev Kumar Gupta @ Dimple Kumar & Dasharath Choudhary @ Dasharath Prasad be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, C.B.I., North Bihar, Patna in connection with Special Case No. 11 of 2003 arising out of R.C. 15(A) of 2003 subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.