ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI
Deepak Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
ORDER
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 vs. 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 No.2/accused are bosom friends an
Munishamappa vs. State of Karnataka
Sampat Babso Kale vs. State of Maharashtra
Parameswaran Unni vs. G. Kannan
Laxmi Dyechem vs. State of Gujarat
Kishan Rao vs. Shankargouda : 2018 CrLJ 3613
Rohitbahi Jivanlal Patel vs. State of Gujarat: 2019 CrLJ 2400
Rangappa vs. Mohan: AIR 2010 SC 1898
MSR Leathers vs. S. Palaniappan: 2013 (4) BLJ 190 (SC) : (2013) 1 SCC 177
Harihara Krishnan vs. J. Thomas: (2018) 13 SCC 663 – Relied.
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.