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

2007 Supreme(Bom) 1211

C.L.PANGARKAR
Madanmohan s/o Kundanlal Chandak – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Shri. B. N. Mohta, Counsel for the applicant.
Shri. D. P. Thakare, APP for the State-respondent.

C. L. PANGARKAR J.

ORAL JUDGMENT:

These two applications under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code can be disposed of by common order since they arise out of a common order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class.

2. The facts giving rise to these applications are as under: Applicant is the complainant in Criminal Cases instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Respondent No. 2 is the accused. It is alleged that respondent No. 2 had issued cheques in favour of the complainant which came to be dishonoured. Since the cheques were so dishonoured notices were issued to respondent No. 2 but respondent No.2 failed to pay amount of cheques inspite of the notice. Hence the complaint came to be filed. Accused after summons was issued, appeared before the Magistrate. The evidence of the complainant was recorded by the Magistrate. There after accused moved several applications which came to be rejected. Ultimately accused filed this application under Section 311 seeking examination of the witness from the bank, Income Tax Office and for recall of the complainant. This application was allowed by the learned Magistrate. Hence these two applicati






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