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

2015 Supreme(P&H) 1913

RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK
MAHINDRA HIRE PURCHASE (REGD) – Appellant
Versus
ASHWANI DADA – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Ramandeep, Advocate for R.S. Bajaj, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Rameshwar Singh Malik, J.

Applicant, by way of instant application under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short), seeks leave of the Court to file the appeal against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 12.10.2011 passed by the learned trial Court, whereby the complaint of the applicant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('NI Act') was dismissed. Applicant also seeks condonation of delay of 839 days in filing the application for leave to appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant- complainant brought on record sufficient and cogent evidence so as to bring home the guilt of respondent-accused. He further submits that an amount of Rs.1.50 lacs was advanced in favour of the respondent. This cheque in question was issued by the respondent with a view to discharge his existing financial liability. Once the cheque was dishonoured because of insufficient funds, applicant-complainant was left with no other option except to file the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act. He further submits that during the course of trial, complainant duly proved his case but the learned trial Court misdirected
























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