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

1996 Supreme(Guj) 120

R.R.JAIN
SATISH JAYANTILAL SHAH – Appellant
Versus
PANKAJ MASHRUWALA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.M.GUPTA, J.B.DASTUR, K.P.RAVAL, KIRAN ACHARYA

R. R. JAIN, J.

( 1 ) THESE applications arise from Criminal Cases Nos. 1361 of 1992 and 1362 of 1992 on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate (Court No. 15), ahmedabad. In each case the learned Magistrate was pleased to hold the applicant guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable instruments Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay fine of Rs. 25,000. 00, in default to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month. Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the learned Magistrate dated 14-10-1994, the applicant also preferred Criminal Appeal Nos. 41 of 1992 and 42 of 1994. The same were decided by learned Additional City Sessions Judge (Court no. 12), Ahmedabad on 1-5-1995, confirming the lower Courts order. Aggrieved by the concurrent finding of both the Courts below, the applicant/original accused has preferred the above Revision Applications.

( 2 ) SINCE in both cases the parties are same and are also represented by same advocates and involve common question of law and facts, are heard and disposed of by this common order at notice stage on perusal of record and proceeding received from trial Court.

( 3 ) THE appli
















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