Back
SAMIT GOPAL
Ashok Kumar Diwedi – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SAMIT GOPAL, J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2, Ms. Arti Agarwal, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
3. Sri Vivek Mishra states that he has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 today in the office. The same is not on record. Office to restore the same in the file and make a note about it in the order sheet.
4. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant-Ashok Kumar Diwedi with the following prayers:
It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be
An inquiry under Section 202 of the CrPC is mandatory before issuing summons to an accused residing outside the Magistrate's jurisdiction in cases under Section 138 of the NI Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that compliance with legal provisions, including the conduct of an inquiry as required under Section 202(1) Cr.P.C., and the applicability of Secti....
For summoning under Section 138 of the NI Act, recording of statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. is not required, and the evidence of the complainant may be given by affidavit as per Section....
The court reiterated that issues around cheque liability under Section 138 NI Act must be decided at trial, underscoring the necessity for allegations in complaints to be accepted as true at the quas....
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
