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

2006 Supreme(Del) 42

J.P.SINGH
DALJEET SINGH CHANDOK – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


J. P. SINGH, J.

( 1 ) THIS petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure has been filed for quashing summoning order dated 4. 3. 1996 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate in a complaint case under Section 138 of the negotiable Instruments Act. There is also prayer for quashing the complaint and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

( 2 ) I have heard Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, learned Counsel for the petitioner and mr. Sanjeev Anand, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 (complainant) on the point of admission and have gone through the impugned order as also copies of the documents placed on the file.

( 3 ) BRIEFLY the facts are that petitioner and others approached the complainant company for availing "inter-corporate deposit" of Rs. 50 lacs for a period of 82 days for commercial purposes. The said request was considered and the deposit of Rs. 50 lacs was given on 13. 9. 1995 against promissory note and receipt executed by the accused company. The company also handed over two post-dated cheques on the said date with a clear stipulation that the said cheques would be honoured positively on presentation. Cheque No. 016303 dated 4. 12. 1995 was for Rs. 50 lacs while cheque

























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