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

1993 Supreme(P&H) 1005

H.S.BRAR
Sushil Singla – Appellant
Versus
Haripal Singh – Respondent


Judgment

, J.

1. This is a petition under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the complaint under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter called "the Act" ).

2. It is stated in the petition that the respondent-complainant, Haripal Singh, filed a complaint in respect of cheque dated March 8, 1992, drawn on State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, for Rs.1,25,000 through Qimat Rai Garg, managing director of M. M. Leasing Limited. It is averred in the petition that the petitioners, Sushil Singla and Madhu Rai Garg, were simply directors of the company and were neither in charge of, nor responsible to the affairs of the company. The cheque was issued by Qimat Rai Garg for and on behalf of the company who was in charge of, and responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company. The petitioners have been impleaded as accused in spite of the fact that no offence has been disclosed against them as is clear from a bare reading of the complaint.

3. Written statement has been filed by Haripal Singh, respondent. He has stated in the reply that the petitioner, Madhu Rai Garg, is the main accused being the wife of Qimat Rai Garg and she was






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