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

2005 Supreme(Bom) 115

DALVEER BHANDARI, D.Y.CHANDRACHUD
KSL and Industries Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Mannalal Khandelwal – Respondent


Judgment

DALVEER BHANDARI, CJ.

( 1 ) ALL these petitions emanate from the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable instruments Act, 1881 (for short, "the Act" ). Therefore, we propose to decide these petitions by a common judgment.

( 2 ) THESE petitions raise following two issues, which are required to be determined:-

(I) Whether the complaint under Section 138 of the Act, according to the legislative mandate, requires to be adjudicated expeditiously and in any event, within six months from the date of the service of summons or warrants on the accused? (ii) Whether, in spite of mandate of Section 145 (1) of the Act, the Court is obliged to examine the complainant even in respect of matters which have been stated of affidavit?

( 3 ) NOW, we would deal with basic facts arid issues involved in individual petitions. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1228 of 2004 :

( 4 ) THE petitioner-Company approached this Court against the order of the learned Sessions Judge delivered in criminal Revision Application No. 713 of 2003 on 28th November, 2003 in proceedings emanated from Section 138 of the Act. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai, by his order dated 1st August, 2003, arrived at the

















































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