Back
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
Siddharth Duggal – Appellant
Versus
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
1. By way of present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C.'), the petitioner seeks following reliefs:
i. setting aside of order dated 17.10.2019 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate-05, Patiala House Courts, Delhi (`learned Magistrate')in Complaint Case No. 4157/2016, as well as order dated 23.01.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-07,Patiala House Courts, Delhi (`learned ASJ') in Criminal Revision Petition No. 106/2020 dismissing the revision petition filed by the petitioner;
ii. allowing the application filed by petitioner under Section 243 read with Section 293 of Cr.P.C. read with Section 45 and 73 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 seeking examination of the cheque in question by Government Scientific Expert and another application seeking summoning of the witnesses as mentioned in the application.
2. The factual background of the present case, in brief, is that respondent no. 2/complainant `M/s. Rakesh Press' had filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (`NI Act') whereby it was stated that the complainan
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the liability of a company and its director under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is contingent on the relationship betwee....
For conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the cheque must be drawn on an account maintained by the accused. Insufficient connection leads to invalid liability.
For maintaining a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, arraigning of the company as an accused is imperative. The person in charge of the company cannot be held liable if ....
Vicarious liability of directors under Section 141(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is contingent on their position at the time of the offense, and procedural irregularities in taking cogni....
The proprietor of a sole proprietorship holding liability for a dishonored cheque under Section 138 NI Act does not require the business entity to be arrayed as an accused.
The presumption of a cheque being issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt under Section 139 N.I.A. and the significance of a security cheque in commercial transactions were central to the c....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
