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

SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)
Madhusudan Chakraborty – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Saryati Datta, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.—The present revision is against an Order No. 12 dated 29.05.2019 in the Criminal Revision No. 125 of 2018 passed by the Learned Addl. District & Session Judge (F.T.C. No. I) at Calcutta confirming the order of conviction and sentence dated 30.01.2018 passed by the Learned 17th M.M. in case no. C-24 of 2006 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, in which the revisionist has been convicted and sentenced to pay compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Five Lacs) to the complainant within two months I/D. suffer simple imprisonment for two months.

2. The complaint case in a nut-shell is that:—

“The accused person/petitioner issued a cheque of Rs. 4,00,000/- being no. 197890 dated 31.11.2005 drawn on UTI bank, Saltlake City Branch, Kolkata – 700 064 in discharge of existing financial liability. Subsequently the said cheque was dishonored with the remarks “insufficient Fund” when the said cheque was deposited in the bank for encashment. Subsequently the complainant herein i.e. the opposite party No.1 sent a demand notice dated 12.12.2005 by registered post with A/D through her learned advocate and the said letter was duly received by the accused/revi

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