Ramesh Yadav v. State ( Govt. of Nct, Delhi)
Case brief
What is this about?
3226/2023 Page 1 of 9 IN THE HIGH COURT OF…
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 01st July, 2024
RAMESH YADAV ..... Applicant
versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT, DELHI) ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Applicant : Mr. S. Premchandra, Advocate (Through V.C.). For the Respondent : Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP for the State alongwith Mr. Mohit Rathi, Ms. Ankita & Mr. Anil Khatri, Advocates & SI Nitesh Mahiya (P.S. Samaypur Badli).
CORAM HON’BLE MR JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
JUDGMENT
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR Signing Da te:0 2.07.2024 15:55:07
BAIL APPLN. 3226/2023
Page 1 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR Signing Da te:0 2.07.2024 15:55:07
BAIL APPLN. 3226/2023
Page 2 of 9
complainant in the company.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR Signing Da te:0 2.07.2024 15:55:07
BAIL APPLN. 3226/2023
Page 3 of 9
November 2019, and was introduced by one Krishna Kumar Pandey. 10. He submitted that Mr.Krishna Pandey had offered a work project to the applicant started by M/s. Reliance Corporate IT Park Ltd.for construction and solar sites in Alwar, Rajasthan.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR Signing Da te:0 2.07.2024 15:55:07
BAIL APPLN. 3226/2023
Page 4 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR Signing Da te:0 2.07.2024 15:55:07
BAIL APPLN. 3226/2023
Page 5 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR BAIL APPLN. 3226/2023 Signing Da te:0 2.07.2024 15:55:07
Page 6 of 9
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR Signing Da te:0 2.07.2024 15:55:07
BAIL APPLN. 3226/2023
Page 7 of 9
custodial interrogation should be avoided since, a great ignominy, humiliation and disgrace is attached to arrest. [Ref: Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth v. State of Gujarat : (2016) 1 SCC 152 ].
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR Signing Da te:0 2.07.2024 15:55:07
BAIL APPLN. 3226/2023
Page 8 of 9
SHO concerned; and
AMIT MAHAJAN, J
JULY 01, 2024
‘Aman’/”SK”
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:HARMINDER KAUR Signing Da te:0 2.07.2024 15:55:07
BAIL APPLN. 3226/2023
Page 9 of 9
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted to an applicant accused of cheating who has cooperated with the investigation.
Whether non-recovery of cheated money justifies custodial interrogation when the accused has joined the investigation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth v. State of GujaratExplained¶64
Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth v. State of Gujarat : (2016) 1 SCC 152 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramesh Yadav
State (Govt. of NCT, Delhi)
Amit Mahajan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court