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

2016 Supreme(P&H) 3409

HARI PAL VERMA
Varinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Sandeep Kumar Chawla – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Applicant:Mr. T.S. Sidhu, Advocate for Mr. Vikas Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Achin Gupta, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Hari Pal Verma, J.:- Though the instant application filed under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C., the applicant challenged the order dated 7.8.2013 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot, vide which the learned Magistrate has acquitted the respondent-accused in a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

2. It is the case of the applicant-complainant that respondentaccused had borrowed a loan of Rs.50,000/- from him for his personal requirements. He has promised to pay the same to him on his demand and in order to clear his liability, the respondent-accused had issued a cheque bearing No.014332 dated 1.8.2008 for a sum of Rs.50,000/- drawn on Central Bank of India in favour of the complainant. However, when the said cheque was presented for encashment through his banker i.e. Punjab and Sind Bank, Branch Dashmesh Public School, Faridkot, it was bounced with the remarks “account closed”. Accordingly, as required under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant has served a legal notice dated 15.10.2008 upon the respondent-accused through his counsel. Despite service of the said notice, respondent-accused has failed to ma











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