Sanjeev Gupta v. Mohinder Khurana And ORS

vks

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.161 OF 2019 IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.230 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.209 OF 2018. ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.162 OF 2019 IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.231 OF 2018 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.208 OF 2018. Sanjeev Gupta ...

Applicant.

IN THE MATTER OF REVISION APPLICATION

Mohinder Khurana ...

Applicant/ Revision Applicant.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and ors ...

Respondents Mr. Santosh H. Chari, for the Applicant.

Shri. Pramod Pandey, for respondent/Revision applicant. Mr. Vinod Chate, APP for respondent state in CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATE : 4th December, 2019.

P.C. :

1] Heard the learned counsels for the applicant and respondent/revision applicant.

1/3

2] The grievance of the applicant is that in terms of order passed by this Court on 28th June, 2018, the Revision applicant/accused had not deposited 50% amount of compensation in the correct name of the complainant/applicant herein.

3] By order dated 15th July, 2019, this Court had recorded statement on behalf of the Revision Applicant that a demand draft payable in favour of M/s Dipty Paper House Private Ltd, would be deposited before the trial Court, within a period of two weeks.

4] The learned counsel for the Revision Applicant has pointed out that on 24th July, 2019, the applicant has complied with the said directions. From the perusal of the copy of the application filed by applicant especially the order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, and office endorsement make it clear that the revision applicant has complied with the said order. Thus, the grievance of the applicant does not survive. 5] The learned counsel for the applicant/complainant submitted that the applicant has not complied with the direction to furnish surety as he was given liberty to furnish cash surety in lieu of surety till 9th August 2018. 6] The learned counsel for the Revision Applicant submits that the Revision Applicant is permanent resident of Delhi and it is difficult for him to arrange a solvent surety and, therefore, he be permitted to remain on bail the basis of cash surety already furnished.

2/3

7] The Revision Applicant is directed to furnish the surety as directed by this Court, by order dated 28th June, 2018 within a period of one month from today. If the applicant is not in a position to furnish solvent surety, he shall furnish additional cash surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/-. 8] Criminal Application Nos. 161 of 2019 and 162 of 2019 stand disposed of accordingly.

9] Revision Applications be listed as per C.M.I.S.date. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] 3/3