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

SANJAY DHAR
Parvaiz Ahmad Bhat – Appellant
Versus
Fida Mohamamd Ayoub – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Rizwan, Advocate
For the Respondent:K.A. Ganai, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Dhar, J.—Petitioners have challenged the complaint filed by respondent against them for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter for short “the NI Act”) read with Section 420 IPC pending before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anantnag. They have also challenged the order dated 27.08.2020, whereby the learned Magistrate has, after taking cognizance of the offences, issued process against the petitioners.

2. It appears from the record of the case that respondent has filed a complaint against the petitioners alleging that cheques bearing No.612444 dated 09.07.2020 for an amount of Rs.15.00 lacs, No.612445 dated 09.07.2020 for an amount of Rs.10.00 lacs and No.612446 dated 09.07.2020 for an amount of Rs.10.00 lacs drawn on J&K Bank Branch Khanabal in favour of respondent/complainant, when presented to the banker, were returned unpaid with the remarks “drawers signature incomplete”. According to respondent/complainant, the petitioners knowing fully-well that the cheques were to be signed by both the petitioners, who happen to be the partners of the firm that has issued the cheques in question, deliberately and intentionally in order

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