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

2010 Supreme(J&K) 62

SUNIL HALI
Sunandan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Advocate For Appellant: Virender Bhat
Advocate For Respondent: Gagan Basotra

1. The petitioner is stated to have sold 2500 shares of M/s NEPC MICON Ltd. to the complainant for an amount of Rs. 1.00 lac. The said shares were required to be sent to the company for its transfer in the name of purchaser. In lieu of the shares being sold, two cheques for Rs. 50,000/- each were issued in favour of the present petitioner-accused. On presentation of these cheques for encashment, the same were returned un-cashed. It is alleged that the petitioner wrote a letter to the company asking it that he has lost his original shares, as such, duplicate shares may be issued in his name. It is, this letter of the petitioner, which has become basis for filing an FIR against him under Section 420 RPC.

2. The allegations against the petitioner in the challan are that he wrote false letter to the company by requesting it to issue duplicate shares as the original shares have been lost. The investigation in the matter was handed over to the police. Conclusion of the investigation reveals that the petitioner had transferred the shares in the name of complainant, but no payment was received by him from the complainant. The allegation that complainant had paid Rs. 50,000/- to the petition













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