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

DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Anil Bhasin – Appellant
Versus
Jasbir Kaur – Respondent


JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. This petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, impugns an order, dated 6th April, 2022, passed by the learned Additional District Judge ("the learned ADJ") in Misc. D.J. 271/2017, on an application filed by the petitioner under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the CrPC").

2. The petitioner was the plaintiff in CS 11143/2016 in which the aforesaid application Misc. D.J. 271/2017, came to be filed. The petitioner sought initiation of proceedings against Respondent 2 on two ground. The first was the signatures of Respondent 1, in the written statement, filed by Respondent 1, were not hers, and that Respondent 2 had forged her signatures. The second was that the Respondent 2 had, despite repeated directions from the Court, failed to provide the complete number of the credit card obtained by Respondent 1 from the ICICI Bank.

3. Respondent 2 filed a reply to the application, in which the allegation of forgery, by him, of the signature of Respondent 1 was categorically denied. It was also asserted that Respondent 2 had complied with the direction, passed by the Court on 26th September, 2014, to provide details of the credit car

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