Back
VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Sumit Nayyar – Appellant
Versus
Nakodar Hindu Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenging trial court's order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's reasoning on evidence relevance. (Para 3 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. arguments about relevance of evidence. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. petition dismissed; no merit found. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Vikram Aggarwal, J. (Oral)
The present petition has been preferred under Section 482 of the Code of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE (in short Cr.P.C.) for quashing the order dated 07th August 2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nakodar vide which the request made by the petitioners (accused in that case) that CW-1 Prem Nath, CEO of the respondent-complainant be asked to produce the record pertaining to the loan account of the petitioner and his guarantor Sachin Nayyar was declined on the ground that it was not relevant regarding the complaint in dispute.
2. The facts, briefly put, are that the respondent-complainant instituted a complaint against the present petitioner under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) read with Section 420 IPC on account of a cheque of Rs.41 lacs having been dishonoured. The petitioner was summoned after preliminary evidence having been led a
The Court's decision was based on the interpretation of Section 311 Cr.P.C. and the application of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in similar cases.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
