CourtKutchehry.com
Supreme CourtDivision Bench

Sharad T. Kabra vs Union of India

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 17 August 2017 · Citation: (2018) 14 SCC 493

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ranjan Gogoi, J · Navin Sinha, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=1767>Indian Penal Code, 1860</a>, <a href=1767-120B>Section 120B</a>, <a href=1767-420>Section 420</a>, <a href=1767-468>Section 468</a>, <a href=1767-471>Section 471</a>, <a href=1767-467>Section 467</a> - Punishment of criminal conspiracy - Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property - Forgery for purpose of cheating - Using as genuine a forged document - Forgery of valuable security, will, etc
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Crl.A. No. 1420 of 2017 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No 2352 of 2017)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 388 words
1.

Leave granted.

2.

We have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

3.

The accused appellant is in custody for a period of over two years facing charges under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"). Though charge-sheet has been submitted as far back as in May, 2015, the trial has not commenced. Even charges have not been framed against the accused appellant. It is stated at the bar that there are total of 13 cases against the accused appellant [8 cases for the offence(s) under the IPC and 5 cases for the offence(s) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short "PMLA")].

4.

From the materials on record, it appears that in the cases registered under the PMLA the accused appellant has been granted bail. Learned counsel for the accused appellant has submitted that in respect of the cases involving offences under the IPC [in which Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is investigating] the accused appellant has either been granted bail or has not been arrested and the present is the only case in connection with which he is in detention.

5.

Be that as it may, having regard to the period of custody suffered and the fact that the trial has not commenced we are of the view that the accused appellant should be released on bail. We order accordingly. Therefore, the appellant is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI & Economic Offences, Indore (M.P.) in connection with Special Case No.02/2015 arising out of RC BD1/E/2014/0008.

6.

At the same time, to take care of the apprehension expressed by the learned Solicitor General for India that the accused appellant may abscond like two other co-accused which apprehension is considered to be reasonable we direct that the learned trial Court will release the accused appellant on bail subject to such conditions including the condition requiring the accused appellant to report to the local police station at periodic intervals as may be considered appropriate and only after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor on the issue of conditions to be imposed for grant of bail.

7.

Consequently, the order of the High Court is set aside and the present appeal is disposed of in the above terms.