ABHAY M.THIPSAY
Pandurang Ramchandra Ghorpade – Appellant
Versus
Vijay Gopala Lohar – Respondent
1. These two appeals can be conveniently disposed of by this common Judgment, as the parties are the same, the facts are common, and the points needing determination are also the same.
2. The appellant is the original complainant. He had, based on the dishonour of two cheques issued in his favour by the respondent No.1 herein, filed two different complaints, alleging the commission of two distinct offences, both punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I.Act hereinafter) by the respondent No.1. After holding two different trials in respect of the said two cheques, the learned Magistrate found the respondent no.1 not guilty and passed an order of acquittal in both the cases. The appellant is aggrieved by the said orders of acquittal. He has, therefore, after obtaining special leave of this court, as contemplated under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code hereinafter) filed the present two appeals, challenging the said orders of acquittal.
3. I have heard Mr.Dilip Bodake, the learned counsel for the appellant. I have heard Mr.H.Noronh
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.