Guddu Kumar v. Union of India through C.B.I
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 120(B), 406, 420, 467, 468, 471
- Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 s. 70
- Chit Fund Act, 1982 ss. 76, 79
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. Considering that the petitioner has cooperated in the investigation, chargesheet has been submitted, the petitioner will not tamper with any of the evidence during pendency of trial, co-accused persons have been provided privilege of anticipatory bail in the aforesaid A.B.As and in the light…
Judgment
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rajeev Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Vishnu Kumar Mahto, Advocate For the C.B.I. :Mr. Anil Kumar, A.S.G.I. 05/ 02.08.2024: Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Ms. Chandana Kumari, A.C. to A.S.G.I. ------ counsel for the C.B.I.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with R.C. Case No. 62 (S)/2017/EOW/R arising out of Complaint Case No. 492/2013, Jamtara P.S. Case No. 313/2013 registered under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120(B) of the I.P.C., Section 70 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and Section 76 & 79 of Chit Fund Act, 1982, pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M-cum-Spl. J.M. C.B.I., Dhanbad.
Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused company opened an office at Court Road, Jamtara under the name and style of “Real Bond Marketing Ltd.” He further submits that now C.B.I. has submitted chargesheet and petitioner has cooperated in the investigation. He then submits that there is no chance of tampering with any evidence during pendency of the trial. He submits that in the light of “Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2022) 10 SCC 51 and in the case of “Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. 2021 SCC Online SC 615 the privilege of anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner. He further submits that co-accused persons have been provided anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 2953 of 2023, A.B.A. No. 3249 of 2022 and A.B.A. No. 11715 of 2022.
Learned A.S.G.I appearing on behalf of C.B.I. opposes the prayer on the ground that money has been deposited in the account of the petitioner and innocent persons have been cheated.
Considering that the petitioner has cooperated in the investigation, chargesheet has been submitted, the petitioner will not tamper with any of the evidence during pendency of trial, co-accused persons have been provided privilege of anticipatory bail in the aforesaid A.B.As and in the light of judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil(supra) and Siddharth (supra), I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner above named, is directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of his surrender / arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M-cum-Spl. J.M. C.B.I., Dhanbad, in connection with R.C. Case No. 62 (S)/2017/EOW/R arising out of Complaint Case No. 492/2013, Jamtara P.S. Case No. 313/2013, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi-
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.