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

M.A.KHAN
Krishna Kumar Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Mohammed Jaros – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. S.P. Singh Chaudhary, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Jitender K. Prajapati, Advocate and Mr. R.P. Luthra. A.P.P.

JUDGMENT

Mahmood Ali Khan, J.- This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order of an Additional Sessions Judge. Karkardooma Courts, Delhi dated 22-8-2000 passed in a revision petition whereby he has set aside the order of a Metropolitan Magistrate dated 16-10-1999 and has restored the criminal complaint which was dismissed in default.

2. The facts are simple. The respondent filed a complaint for prosecution of the petitioner for committing offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It was fixed before the Magistrate on 16-10-1999 on which date the complainant did not attend hearing. Learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint. This order was challenged by the respondent in a revision petition preferred before the Additional Sessions Judge. The Additional Sessions Judge though agreed with the petitioner accused that revision petition was not maintainable but was of the view that the court in exercise of the power vested by Section 397 Cr.P.C. may examine the legality and propriety of any findings sentence and order so it can also look into any illegality of the proceeding by an inferior court. He held that the order impugned in the revision p

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