Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
GIRISH KATHPALIA, J
Dilshad Hussain – Appellant
Versus
Pushpa Devi – Respondent
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. By way of this petition, brought under Section 528 BNSS (Section 482 CrPC), the petitioner seeks setting aside of order dated 20.11.2023 passed by the learned trial court in proceedings titled Pushpa Devi vs Dilshad Hussain under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, whereby application of the petitioner under Section 311 CrPC was dismissed; and order dated 20.03.2025 of learned Court of Sessions in proceedings under Section 397 CrPC, refusing to interfere. Having heard, learned counsel for petitioner, I find it not a fit case to invoke inherent jurisdiction of this court in order to interfere with the impugned orders.
2. Briefly stated, circumstances leading to the present petition are as follows.
2.1 The petitioner, facing trial under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act filed an application under Section 311 CrPC before the Trial Court, seeking to summon records of another proceedings, titled Pushpa Devi vs Lucky Singh Siddhu under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, contending that the said records would establish falsity of the case of the complainant. The application was strongly opposed by the counsel for complainant (respondent herein), contending th
Interlocutory orders do not determine rights or liabilities and are not revisable under Section 397(2) CrPC, emphasizing the distinction between interlocutory and intermediate orders.
The court clarified that an order allowing expert opinion under Section 45 of the Evidence Act is an intermediate order affecting rights, not merely interlocutory, and the court cannot collect eviden....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Section 482 Cr.P.C. in setting aside orders and recalling witnesses, along with the understanding that orders under 311 Cr.P.....
Section 397 empowers Court of Sessions or even this Court to examine record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court against closure of any proceeding.
It seems well settled that at the Sections 227-228 stage the court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record with a view to finding out if the facts emerging therefrom taken at the....
The inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC cannot be invoked against an interlocutory order when the appeal is barred by Section 397(2) CrPC.
Orders under Section 311 Cr.P.C. are interlocutory and revisions against such orders are not maintainable, affirming the court's power to allow subsequent applications to ensure justice.
An order under section 205 of the Code refusing the application for dispensing with personal appearance of the accused is an interlocutory order and while so a revision against that order is barred u....
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
