ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI
Deepak Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
ORDER
Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.
Instant appeal has been filed in accordance with Section 376(4) of the CrPC after having special leave granted by this Court vide order dated 22.11.2010 under SLA No. 14/2018. It is needless to say that complainant is the appellant and the judgment impugned is dated 08.02.2018 passed by ACJM-1st, Danapur in Complaint Case No. 953/2014, Trial No. 20/2015 (Deepak Kumar v. Anil Kumar Gupta) acquitting Respondent No.2.
2. At the time of admission, the judgment impugned has been gone through and perceiving the finding of the learned lower court under para-4 as well as 9 of the judgment, the Respondent No.2 has been noticed to the effect as to why not the judgment impugned be set aside, waiving the rigour so laid down under Section 390 of the CrPC perceiving the nature of offence to be under Section 138 of the NI Act, summons triable, bailable one, whereupon, there has been appearance of Respondent No.2. During midst thereof, lower court record has been called. That means to say, at the stage of admission, the appeal is being disposed of in its finality.
3. Heard the parties.
4. It is the case of the appellant/complainant that he as well as Respondent N
Munishamappa & Ors. v. State of Karnataka
Sampat Babso Kale and Ors. vs. The State of Maharashtra
Parameswaran Unni v. G. Kannan
Laxmi Dyechem v. State of Gujarat
Kishan Rao v. Shankargouda : 2018 CrLJ 3613. (Para 15)
Rohitbahi Jivanlal Patel v. State of Gujarat: 2019 CrLJ 2400. (Para 16)
Rangappa v. Mohan: AIR 2010 SC 1898. (Para 18)
MSR Leathers v. S. Palaniappan: (2013) 1 SCC 177. (Para 19)
Harihara Krishnan v. J. Thomas: (2018) 13 SCC 663. (Para 20)
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.