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

S.B.SINHA, HARJIT SINGH BEDI
Veer Prakash Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Anil Kumar Agarwal – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mohan Pandey and S.S. Bandyopadhyay, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Jitendra Mohan Sharma, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

S.B. SINHA, J.—

1. Leave granted.

2. The parties hereto entered into a contract for sale and purchase of welding rods. Appellant allegedly did not pay some amount due from him towards supply of the said article. He issued two cheques for a sum of Rs. 3,559/- and Rs. 3,776/- in the year 1983. The said cheques were dishonoured. Alleging that by reason of such act, the appellant has committed offences under Sections 406, 409, 402 and 417 of the Indian Penal Code, a complaint petition was filed by the First Respondent in the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Rampur which was marked CC No. 132 of 1986. The principal allegation made therein against the appellant reads as under:

“That applicant, regarding these cheques and payment of money, wrote several times to accused and also sent his representative. But he kept on making excuses in making payment. At last he told on 19.12.1985 that he had issued fabricated cheques knowingly with an intention to cheat him and grab his money. He would not pay his money, he is free to take any action, whatever he likes.”

3. In his statement under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Respondent No.1 alleged:

“...Both the Cheques

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