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

2017 Supreme(Del) 2983

ASHUTOSH KUMAR
VEENA – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Vijay Kinger.
For the Respondent: Mr. Arun Kr.Sharma, APP., Ms.S.R.Padhy, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.

1. The appellant/complainant is aggrieved by the judgment dated 29.11.2016 passed in Crl.Appeal No.1216/2016 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdara District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby the judgment and order of the Trial Court dated 08.09.2016/01.10.2016 convicting the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentencing him to undergo SI for six months, to pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rs.3 lakhs) and in default of which to further undergo SI for six months, has been set aside and the respondent has been acquitted of all charges.

2. The appellant is said to have given Rs.5 lakhs to the respondent as family loan which was promised to be returned within two months. The complaint filed by the appellant inter-alia states that Rs.2 lakhs was paid to the appellant by the respondent towards the discharge of the liability against the aforesaid family loan. The cheque in question of Rs.3 lakhs, i.e. the balance amount, when presented before the bank by the appellant, was dishonoured because of insufficiency of funds. A legal notice dated 15.04.2009 was sent through registered A.D post and UPC on 17.04.2009. Since































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