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

2015 Supreme(Jhk) 220

RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
Mulchand Agrawal – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. A. K. Sahani
For the State : A. P. P.

ORDER :

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. In the present criminal miscellaneous petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 16.5.2001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 517 of 1998, whereby and whereunder, the application field on behalf of the petitioner for discharge has been rejected.

3. The prosecution story as it appears from the complaint petition which has been instituted by the complainant/ opposite party No. 2, in brief, is that on 30.3.1998 a payment was made through a cheque bearing No. VB77CB/C322458 dated 30.3.1998 for a sum of Rs. 50,000/-and when the cheque was presented to the bank of the opposite party No. 2, the same was returned on 5.5.1998 with a note "insufficient fund". Accordingly, it has been stated that the complainant/ opposite party No. 2 sent a legal notice on 28.5.1998 and when no response was forthcoming from the petitioner, the complaint case was instituted.

4. After holding an enquiry u/s 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr. P.C.) by recording the evidence of witnesses, cognizance was taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate for the offences u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instrum











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