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

2022 Supreme(Ori) 16

R.K.PATTANAIK
Gadadhar Barik – Appellant
Versus
Pradeep Kumar Jena – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. A. Pattanaik, Advocate, for the Appellant, Mr. D.R. Parida, Asc, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

R.K. Pattanaik, J. - The petitioner has approached this Court by invoking jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. assailing legality and judicial propriety of order of cognizance dated 2nd February 2011 (Annexure-3) passed in I.C.C. No.427 of 2010 by the learned S.D.J.M., Khurda on the grounds inter alia that it is not sustainable in law and therefore, liable to be quashed.

2. The petitioner pleaded that unless the impugned order under Annexure-3 is quashed, there would be miscarriage of justice and hence, inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised. The petitioner happens to be the accused in a complaint case pending before the court below for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (here-in-after referred to as 'the NI Act') which has been filed by OP No.1 alleging therein that the former had taken a hand loan of Rs.40,000/- to meet his personal needs and when it could be paid back, on 15th May, 2010, some henchmen of OP No.1 forcibly entered inside his residence and managed to obtain a cheque for an amount of Rs.40,000/- drawn in the UCO Bank, Khurda Branch, Khurda and thereafter, presented it be

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