Ram Satis Kurup @ Ram Satish Kurup @ Ram Satiya Kurup @ R.Satish Kumar Kurup and Another vs State of Jharkhand and Another

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that so far as defect no.89 is concerned, the statement of earlier movement is made in paragraph no.3.

In view of such submission and  looking to the said  paragraph defect no.89 is ignored.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that so far as the defect no.72(i) is concerned, he will remove the same in course of the day.

Let him do so.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that now the charge sheet has been submitted and the cognizance has been taken and he further submits that the allegations are made that informant company was in business terms with the company namely M/s Credence Pvt. Ltd. and these petitioners happened to be employees of that company and in the complaint petition it is disclosed that for certain transaction the amount has also been received by the respondent  no.2  who  is  the  informant.  He  further  submits  that  now  these petitioners are working with M/s Credence Pvt. Ltd. and they have left the service w.e.f the year 2012 itself.

Issue notice upon the respondent no.2 by registered post with A/d as well as under ordinary process for which requisites etc must be filed within one week after Deepawali Vacation.

Let this matter appear on 9.12.2024.

Till the next date, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners in connection with Adityapur P.S.Case No.66 of 2013, G.R. No.290 of 2013 Pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State will assist the Court on the law point on the next date of listing.