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

1999 Supreme(Raj) 379

ARUN MADAN
Hanuman Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Laduram & Mahaveer Prasad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Rohitashwa Kajla, for Complainant Petitioner Rajendra Yadav, Public Prosecutor

Honble MADAN, J.–This criminal revision petition is preferred against the ju-dgment of the learned trial Court whereby it has acquitted the accused respondents for the offence under Section 420, IPC.

(2). Brief facts relevant for deciding this revision petition are that petitioner Hanuman Prasad filed a complaint under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. with the allegations inter-alia that he had good relations with the accused respondents, who had come to his place in village Devroad on 2.8.90 with a proposal to purchase an agricultural land situated adjacent to their lands in village Kherla and they also re-quested to provide them loan of Rs. 44,000/-which was given by him to them with the understanding to repay the same within 15 days. After a lapse of aforesaid 15 days, when the complainant was not repaid aforesaid loan amount by the accused-respondents, he went to the place of the accused with the reminder to make repayment of the amount but all in vain and one day on 1.9.1990, accused-respon-dent No. 1 alongwith his friend whom he did not know, came to his house situated in his agricultural field when he was told that they could not arrange the amount and requested to accept a cheque so









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