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

2023 Supreme(All) 2624

SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH
Sunita Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Applicant : Ashish Kumar Singh.
For the Opposite Party : G.A.

Table of Content
1. complaint filed with delay under ni act. (Para 2)
2. arguments on the necessity of serving notice. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's observations on delay procedure. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. application allowed; remittance to lower court. (Para 13 , 14 , 15)

JUDGMENT

Saumitra Dayal Singh, J.

Heard Shri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Challenge has been raised to the order dated 13.12.2021 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fast Track Court, Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 1690 of 2021 (Ashwani Bhatnagar v. Sunita Agarwal), filed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the NI Act'). Undisputedly, the above criminal complaint was filed with delay. The cheque in question was dishonoured on 13.06.2018. It was returned with the dishonour memo on 28.06.2018. Legal notice was first issued to the Opposite party no. 2 on 26.07.2018 where after criminal complaint was lodged on 27.10.2018. As to the delay in lodging the complaint, the learned court below has condoned the delay and thereafter taken cognizance on the complaint and summone

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