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

2005 Supreme(Raj) 1394

H.R.PANWAR
Babulal – Appellant
Versus
Aanpurna Sarees – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Suresh Kumbhat, for the Petitioner.
Mr. I.S. Pareek, for the Non-Petitioners.

Judgment

H.R. Panwar, J.-This criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short the Code hereinafter) is directed against the order dated 20.01.2004 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balotra (for short the trial Court hereinafter) in Criminal Case 588/2002 whereby on an application filed by accused-non-petitioners, the trial Court dismissed the complaint filed by petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short the Act hereinafter), even after taking cognizance of offence, discharged the accused-non-petitioners. Aggrieved by the order impugned, the petitioner-complainant filed the instant revision petition.

2. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the order impugned and the record of the trial Court.

3. The facts giving rise to the instant revision petition are that the petitioner filed a complaint against non-petitioners under Section 138 of the Act on 09.05.2002. The trial Court recorded the statement of complainant, and after perusal of statement and the documents filed by the complainant, came to the conclusion that prima facie offence under Section 138 of the Act is m

















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