Back
R.BANUMATHI, INDIRA BANERJEE
Bir Singh – Appellant
Versus
Mukesh Kumar – Respondent
The respondent-accused's conviction was for a period of six months of imprisonment, which was the reduction from the original one-year sentence imposed by the trial court (!) (!) .
JUDGMENT :
INDIRA BANERJEE, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals are against a Judgment and order dated 21.11.2017 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh allowing the Criminal Revisional Application being Criminal Revision Petition No. 849 of 2016 filed by the respondent-accused, challenging a judgment and order dated 20.2.2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal in Criminal Appeal No. 13/2015 filed by the respondent-accused, inter-alia, affirming a judgment and order of conviction of the respondent-accused, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Palwal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
3. It is the case of the appellant-complainant, that the respondent-accused issued a cheque being Cheque No. 034212 dated 4.3.2012 drawn on Axis Bank, Branch, Palwal in the name of the appellant towards repayment of a “friendly loan” of Rs. 15 lakhs advanced by the appellant-complainant to the respondent-accused.
4. On 11.4.2012, the appellant-complainant deposited the said cheque in his bank, but the cheque was returned unpaid with the endorsement “Insufficient Fund.”
5. The appellant-complainant has alleged that, on the assurance of the
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
