ALOK SINGH
RAM PRASAD DANGWAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent
Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. : Mr. Lokendra Dobhal, learned counsel for the revisionist.
2. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned Assistant government Advocate for the State of Uttarakhand on behalf of respondent no. 1.
3. Mr. Pawan Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.
4. By way of this revision, revisionist is challenging the order passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge CBI/Anti Corruption, Uttarakhand, Dehradun dated 24.08.2001 whereby learned first Revisional Court allowed the revision of the complainant/respondent herein.
5. Brief facts of the case are that complainant/respondent herein filed a complaint under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 before Chief Judicial Magistrate on 31.07.1998 which was transferred to the Court of Judicial Magistrate I, Dehradun. On 31.08.1998 learned Judicial Magistrate I Dehradun recorded statement of the complainant under section 200 of Cr.P.C.. Vide order dated 17.03.1999 learned Judicial Magistrate I, Dehradun took cognizance of the matter and directed to summon the accused/revisionist herein.
6. Having received the summon the accused/revisionist herein moved an objection/application to recall the summoning order
1. K.M. Mathew vs. State of Kerala and another 1992 (1) SCC 217.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.