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

2012 Supreme(Raj) 1205

SANDEEP MEHTA
Chand Ratan – Appellant
Versus
Roop Chand – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Rakesh Arora, Advocate.
For the Respondent:US Gehlot, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - All these three misc. petitions are decided by this common order as they involve common question of law.

2. These misc. petitions have been preferred by the petitioner seeking consolidation of three criminal cases registered against him for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the bouncing of four cheques held by the respondent Roop Chand.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that all the four cheques in relation whereto three separate complaints have been filed have been issued in the year 2007 i.e. to say all the three cases relate to the offence of the same kind having been committed within a period of one year. It is submitted that in each of three complaints, reference has been made to all the four cheques and thus, by virtue of Section 219 Cr.P.C., the complaints should be directed to be consolidated. In support of his contention, learned counsel has placed reliance upon the judgments of this Court rendered in the cases of (1) Bhadar Ram and Ors. v. State and Ors. reported in 2008(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 297 and (2) Kamal Garg v. State and Anr. reported in 2008(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 459.

4. Per contra, counsel for the respondent opposed the praye








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