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

S. ABDUL NAZEER, J. B. PARDIWALA
Yogesh Jain – Appellant
Versus
Sumesh Chadha – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Ms. Sweta Rani, Advocate, Mr. Anant Agarwal, Advocate, For the Appellant.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. These appeals are at the instance of the original complainant of a complaint lodged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short 'the N.I. Act') and are directed against the orders passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dated 15.01.2020 in the CRM-M No. 27736 of 2019 by which the High Court quashed the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Ludhiana summoning the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the order passed by the High Court dated 29.01.2020 in the CRM No. 3389 of 2020 (recall application) in CRM-M No. 27736 of 2019 by which the High Court rejected the application for recalling of the above order dated 15.01.2020 passed in the CRM-M No. 27736 of 2019.

3. The respondent (original accused) although served with the notice issued by this Court yet has chosen not to remain present before this Court either in person or through an advocate and oppose these appeals.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and having gone through the materials on record, more particularly the impugned order, we find that the High Court thought fit to quash th

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