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

2023 Supreme(All) 2368

SADHNA RANI ( THAKUR )
Prashant Tyagi – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Applicant : Amrendra Nath Rai, Sanjay Singh.
For the Opposite Party : G.A., Abhinav Gaur, Anoop Trivedi, Vibhu Rai.

JUDGMENT

Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur), J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

2. By moving this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the prayer is made to quash summoning order dated 25.11.2016 passed by the Upper Nyayalaya Pratham, Ghaziabad in C.C. No.67/2016 under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act and also to set aside order dated 22.02.2018 passed by the Additional Session Judge, Court No.15, Ghaziabad in Criminal Revision No.15 of 2017.

3. As per facts of the case, a complaint was filed by opposite party no.2 on 13.10.2016 against the applicants and six other persons with the version that opposite party no.2 was a limited Company registered under Companies Act and Vijay Kumar son of late Sri Satpal was authorized to filed complaint on behalf of the Company. The opposite party no.2 was indulged in the business of purchasing, selling and the construction of properties. Opposite party no.1 (in the complaint) M/S C.S.K. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. was a registered Company. Opposite parties no.2 to 6 were its Directors and officers and opposite parties no.7 to 9 were the Company's authorized representatives. Opp

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