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

2011 Supreme(UK) 655

PRAFULLA C.PANT
YASHPAL SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Revisionist :Mr. Vinod Sharma, Advocate
For the State : Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.

1. This revision is directed against the order dated 07.01.2004, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/1st Fast Track Court, Dehradun, in Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2003, whereby said court has partly allowed the appeal but affirmed the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court (Special Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun) in Criminal Complaint Case No. 854 of 2003, against the accused/revisionist.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.

3. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 Gulab Singh filed a criminal complaint before the Magistrate with the allegations that on 29.11.1999, respondent No.2 Gulab Singh, in order to repay loan of Rs. 50,000/- payable by him to the complainant gave a Cheque Bearing No. 0093159 (Ex. A1). However, on presentation of said cheque with the bankers, the same was dishonored on 09.12.1999. Consequently, on 13.12.1999, notice was issued by the complainant to the respondent No.2 (drawer). However, he failed to make a payment within 15 days of receipt of the notice. Hence, the criminal complaint was filed in respect of offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable In








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