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

2013 Supreme(HP) 785

KULDIP SINGH
RAM KRISHAN – Appellant
Versus
RAMESH KUMAR – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
G.D.VERMA, B.C.VERMA, TARLOK CHAUHAN, VIJAY CHAUDHARY

JUDGEMENT

1. KULDIP Singh This judgment shall dispose of Cr.MP No.179 of 2013 in Cr.MMO No.8 of 2012 and Cr.MMO No.68 of 2012 as common and overlapping questions of law are involved in both the matters. Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes

2. THE relevant facts, in brief, are that respondent/complainant Ramesh Kumar filed a complaint under Section 138 readwith Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against petitioner/accused Ram Krishan. In the complaint, accused moved an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( for short 'Code') to recall for cross -examination complainant along with original agreement executed probably on 18.08.2010 in respect of apple crop of complainant purchased by accused. This application was dismissed by trial Magistrate on 05.12.2011. The accused filed Cr.MMO No.8 of 2012 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code and assailed order dated 05.12.2011. Cr.MMO No.8 of 2012 was dismissed on 13.01.2012. The accused has filed Cr.MP No.179 of 2013 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India readwith Section 482 of the Code for recallin





















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