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

2001 Supreme(Kar) 671

G.PATRI BASAVANA GOUD
NITYANAND – Appellant
Versus
JAMUNA PARSHAD – Respondent


Advocates:
RAMESH CHANDRA AGARWAL

G. PATRI BASAVANA GOUD, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is facing prosecution for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('n. I. Act' for short), on the complaint filed under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the respondent-complainant. The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance, has recorded sworn statement of the complainant, has found sufficient ground to proceed, and has directed issuing of process. The petitioner is aggrieved with the same.

( 2 ) THE case concerns two cheques allegedly issued by the petition eraccused in favour of the respondent-complainant, both dated 5-10-1999, one for Rs. 1,00,000/- and another for Rs. 50,000/-, both drawn on syndicate Bank, Gavipuram Extension Branch, Bangalore. On cheques being dishonoured on presentation for encashment, the respondent-complainant got issued a notice dated 26-10-1999 making a demand in writing as contemplated under clause (b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the N. I. Act. No payment of the amounts covered by the cheques having been made within fifteen days of receipt of notice, complaint came to be filed.

( 3 ) SRI Ramesh Chandra, learned Counsel for the petitioner-accused, herein, has t







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