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

SNEH PRASHAR
Vijay Singh Solanki – Appellant
Versus
Vishal Gupta – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Tanmoy Gupta, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Sneh Prashar, J.—The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘Cr.P.C’.) has been filed for setting aside the order dated 13.3.2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad whereby the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner was dismissed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had borrowed a sum of Rs.7,50,000 from the respondent-complainant and issued a cheque bearing No.194003 dated 9.2.2008 for the said amount drawn on Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. But when the said cheque was presented in the Bank for encashment, it was returned for insufficiency of funds. The respondent -complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court.

3. The submissions made by Mr.Tanmoy Gupta, Advocate have been heard.

4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has committed an error while dismissing the application of the petitioner for recalling the respondent complainant for further cross-examination. He referred to Section







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