SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(SC) 951

Anil Kumar Sahney – Appellant
Versus
Gulshan Rai – Respondent


Advocates:
KAILASH VASUDEV, P.K.JAIN, RAJENDRA NARAIN, Y.K.Jain

JUDGMENT

KULDIP SINGH, J.- Leave granted.

2. Anil Kumar Sawhney filed three complaints before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal alleging that Gulshan Rai, the accused therein, had committed an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 1988 (for short the Act). The learned Magistrate issued summons in each of the three complaints to Gulshan Rai for his appearance in the said proceedings. Gulshan Rai challenged the orders of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate before the Punjab and Haryana High Court by way of criminal miscellaneous petitions under Section 482, CrPC. Learned Single Judge of the High Court quashed the proceedings on the short ground that the cheques in dispute being post-dated cheques, the provisions of Section 138 of the Act were not attracted and, as such, no offence was made out on the admitted facts of the criminal complaints. These appeals by way of special leave petitions are by Anil Kumar Sawhney against the order of the High Court.

3. The appellant and the respondent were the shareholders of M/s Sai Beverages Private Limited, a private limited company having its registered office at Karnal. The company had two groups of share


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top