The court dismissed an anticipatory bail petition where the petitioner failed to comply with a prior undertaking to supply the remaining quantity of rice under a purchase order, rendering the petition untenable for this court to entertain.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~5
STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr Amit Gupta, APP for State. SI Vishal Tiwari, PS Hauz Khas. Mr Vishal Raj Sehijpal, Advocate for complainant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R % 16.09.2019
CRL.M.(BAIL) 160/2019
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
SEPTEMBER 16, 2019 RK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present anticipatory bail petition should be entertained considering the petitioner's failure to comply with a prior undertaking to supply remaining rice.
Pandu Morimisetty
State
Vibhu Bakhu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
