Logo
niyam.ai

Central Bureau Of Investigation vs Moin Akhtar Qureshi 2019 Latest Caselaw 998 Del

Judges:

Full Judgement

Delhi High Court Central Bureau Of Investigation vs Moin Akhtar Qureshi on 14 February, 2019 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 14, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 760/2019 and Crl.M.A. 3098/2019 CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, SPP for CBI with Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocate Versus MOIN AKHTAR QURESHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. R.K. Handoo, Mr. Yoginder Handoo and Mr. Aditya Chaudhary, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) Petitioner has aggrieved by trial court's order of 1st February, 2019 vide which respondent has been allowed to travel abroad upon furnishing of FDR/Bank Guarantee of ₹2 Crores. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI draws the attention of this Court to order of 18th December, 2018 (Annexure A-4) of co-accused- Pradeep, vide which a Coordinate Bench of this Court has allowed the co-accused-Pradeep to travel abroad upon furnishing of FDR/Bank Guarantee of ₹6 Crores and so, it is submitted that on parity basis impugned order deserves to be modified while requiring respondent to furnish FDR/Bank Guarantee of ₹6 Crores. On the contrary, learned counsel for respondent submits that condition of furnishing of FDR/Bank Guarantee of ₹2 Crores is CRL. M.C. 760/2019 Page 1 of 2 unjustified as liberty of an accused cannot be curtailed. It is submitted that respondent has filed an application before the trial court to reduce the FDR/Bank Guarantee amount from ₹2 Crores to ₹50,00,000/- as on earlier occasions, respondent has travelled abroad while furnishing FDR/Bank Guarantee of ₹50,00,000/-. Upon hearing, on perusal of impugned order, order of 18th December, 2018 (Annexure A-4), reply of respondent and the material on record, I find that respondent was allowed to travel abroad earlier while furnishing FDR/Bank Guarantee of ₹50,00,000/- but to maintain parity with co-accused-Pradeep, respondent has to now furnishing FDR/Bank Guarantee of ₹6 Crores as the case of respondent and co-accused-Pradeep is said to be at par. In the reply filed by respondent it is not stated that respondent is not able to furnish the FDR/Bank Guarantee of ₹6 Crores. In the facts and circumstances of this case, it deemed appropriate to put respondent at par with co-accused-Pradeep. Thus, impugned order of 1st February, 2019 is modified to enhance the FDR/Bank Guarantee amount from ₹2 Crores to ₹6 Crores. With aforesaid modification, this petition and application are accordingly disposed of. A copy of this order be given dasti to learned counsel for the parties under the signatures of Court Master. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE FEBRUARY 14, 2019 p'ma CRL. M.C. 760/2019 Page 2 of 2

Similar Judgements

Vashist Narayan Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. 2024 Latest Caselaw 1 SC

Vashist Narayan Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2024 rising out of SLP (C) No. 12230 of 2023] K.V. Viswanathan, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Vashist Narayan Kumar (the appellant)...

View Details

State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Association of Retired Supreme Court and High Court Judges at Allahabad & Ors. 2024 Latest Caselaw 4 SC

State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Association of Retired Supreme Court and High Court Judges at Allahabad & Ors. [Civil Appeal Nos. 23-24 of 2024 Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos. 8575-8576 of 2023] ...

View Details

Vishal Tiwari Vs. Union of India & Ors. 2024 Latest Caselaw 5 SC

Vishal Tiwari Vs. Union of India & Ors. [Writ Petition (C) No. 162 of 2023] [Writ Petition (Crl) No. 39 of 2023] [Writ Petition (C) No. 201 of 2023] [Writ Petition (Crl) No. 57 of 2023] Dr. Dhana...

View Details

Mary Pushpam Vs. Telvi Curusumary & Ors. 2024 Latest Caselaw 10 SC

Mary Pushpam Vs. Telvi Curusumary & Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 9941 of 2016] Vikram Nath, J. 1. The rule of 'Judicial Discipline and Propriety' and the Doctrine of precedents has a merit of promoting c...

View Details

Perumal Raja @ Perumal Vs. State represented by Inspector of Police 2024 Latest Caselaw 14 SC

Perumal Raja @ Perumal Vs. State represented by Inspector of Police [Criminal Appeal No._______ of 2024 arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 863 of 2019] Sanjiv Khanna, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The im...

View Details

Bharti Airtel Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Vijaykumar V. Iyer and Ors. 2024 Latest Caselaw 15 SC

Bharti Airtel Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Vijaykumar V. Iyer and Ors. [Civil Appeal Nos. 3088-3089 of 2020] Sanjiv Khanna, J. 1. The present appeals raise an interesting question on the right to claim set-of...

View Details