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

2006 Supreme(Bom) 2091

A.S.OKA
BHARAT S. DAHANUKAR – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


JUDGMENT :- These Applications under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code) can be conveniently disposed of by a common order. Prayer in these Applications is for quashing the complaints filed by the second Respondent under section 138 and section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. In both the complaints, the learned Magistrate has issued process.

2. The question is whether these Applications can be entertained when a remedy available to the Applicants to prefer a Revision Application under section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code) for challenging the order issuing process has not been exhausted by the Applicants. This issue arises in view of a decision of the learned single Judge of this Court in the case of V. K. Jain and ors. vs. Pratap V. Padode and anr., 2005(3) Mh.L.J. 778.

3. Shri Jha, the learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants did not dispute that order passed by the learned Magistrate of issuing process can be challenged by the Applicants by filing a Revision Application under section 397 of the said Code and that the Applicants have not filed such a














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