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

P.N.SINHA
Asim Kumar Saha – Appellant
Versus
Nepal Mahato – Respondent


Counsel for the parties :
For the Petitioner:Himangsu De, Suman De, Supratim Dhar, Advocates.
For the Opposite Party :Sudipto Moitra, Sutapa Sanyal, Advocates.

ORDER

P.N. Sinha, J. — This revisional application is directed against judgment and order dated 20.9.02 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Purulia in Criminal Appeal No 8/02 thereby affirming the judgment and order of conviction dated 30-4-2000 (sic) passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate (in short CJM), Purulia in complaint Case No. 36/2000 under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short N.I. Act) thereby sentencing the accused petitioner to pay a fine of Rs. 1,50,000/- i.e. to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months with further direction that if the amount of fine be paid, Rs. 1,49,400/- out of the fine amount shall be paid to complainant O P. No. 1 Nepal Mahato as compensation. Being aggrieved by, and dissatisfied with, the order of affirmation of sentence by the learned Sessions Judge, the accused petitioner has preferred the instant revisional application.

2.Mr. Himangshu De, learned Advocate appearing for the accused petitioner submitted that handwriting over the cheque in question is disputed.

Name of Nepal Mahato, the complainant is appearing in the front page and the back page of the cheque and these two writings of the name Nepal Mahato is almo

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