Case Law Details
Vipin Sharma Vs State of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
Held that keeping in view the gravity of the crime, it being socio-economic offence, petitioner is not entitled for pre-arrest bail.
Facts-
A perusal of the report lodged by the Chairman of the Corporation/APSSDC shows that as per the scrutiny of records by ADGGI, it is revealed that training software development including various sub-modules shown as supplied by M/s Skillar to Design Tech were purchased by Skillare from 1) M/s. Allied Computers International (Asia) Ltd. Mumbai, 2) M/s. Patrick Info Services Private Limited, M/s. I.T. Smith Solutions Private Limited, 3) M/s. Inweb Info Services Private Limited all based at New Delhi, 4) M/s. Arihanth Traders, New Delhi, 5) M/s. G.A. Sales Private Limited, New Delhi.
According to the prosecution, out of five, petitioner purchased three shell companies. The prosecution also got information that wife of the petitioner is one of the Directors in two companies out of three companies purchased by the petitioner. During examination of the petitioner, on 22.12.2021 and 18.04.2022, the prosecution could get some information and the petitioner was supposed to appear before investigating officer for further examination and he is supposed to cooperate with investigation. However, petitioner avoided to appear before investigating officer during crucial period.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
