https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402543 Anticipatory bail was declined in proceedings arising from allegations of cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy. The petitioners invoked Section 438 CrPC on the basis that money had been taken on a promise to execute a sale deed and that cheques were later used in a manner said to involve dishonour. The Court found that one petitioner had already enjoyed interim protection but had not joined the investigation, while the other was alleged to have been directly involved in the transaction and subsequent conduct. In view of these facts, no basis was found to extend interim protection or grant anticipatory bail. en-us Mon, 04 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:46:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402543 Anticipatory bail was declined in proceedings arising from allegations of cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy. The petitioners invoked Section 438 CrPC on the basis that money had been taken on a promise to execute a sale deed and that cheques were later used in a manner said to involve dishonour. The Court found that one petitioner had already enjoyed interim protection but had not joined the investigation, while the other was alleged to have been directly involved in the transaction and subsequent conduct. In view of these facts, no basis was found to extend interim protection or grant anticipatory bail. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 04 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402543