Cheating case: Anurag Thakur gets relief as district court sets aside lower court's order | punjab | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Mar 29, 2017-Wednesday
New Delhi
  • Humidity
  • Wind

Cheating case: Anurag Thakur gets relief as district court sets aside lower court's order

punjab Updated: Feb 19, 2015 19:53 IST
HT Correspondent
Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association


In a relief to the Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association (HPCA) chief Anurag Thakur, the court of district and sessions judge here on Thursday set aside the orders passed by the lower court on August 1, 2014, wherein a non- bailable arrest warrant was issued against him and his close aide.

Allowing the revision petition filed by HPCA against the district and sessions judge, Justice SL Sharma also set aside the orders forfeiting the surety bond furnished by Thakur and former state president of Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha (BJYM) Narender Attri.

The court has fixed the next date of hearing in the case on April 6, ordering Thakur and Attri to appear before the trial court and furnish fresh surety bond.

The court of chief judicial magistrate had issued non-bailable warrants against the duo for not appearing before the court, in a case of obstructing a public servant from discharging his duty. HPCA had later moved the district and sessions court filing a revision petition challenging the order.

The case

The case pertains to October 24, 2013 when Anurag Thakur had visited vigilance bureau office at Dharamsala to join investigation in a case of cheating registered against HPCA. Anurag's supporters, who accompanied him, had staged a protest at vigilance bureau office premises.

The vigilance bureau had summoned Anurag to appear before the investigating officer on October 24, which happens to be his birthday. After a controversy erupted on the issue the vigilance bureau postponed the date to October 31.
Anurag alleged that bureau was harassing him and deliberately called him on his birthday.

Besides Anurag, the case was registered against five others, who had entered the office of superintendent of police (SP) vigilance office, under section 186 of the Indian Penal Code.