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

2013 Supreme(MP) 640

S.R.WAGHMARE
Shailendra Dubey – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh – Respondent


Advocates:
P.M. Jain for applicant; Smt. Mamta Shandilya, Panel Lawyer for respondent No. 2/State.

ORDER

1. This M.Cr.C. has been filed under section 378(4) of the CrPC for grant of leave to file appeal. The applicant is aggrieved by the order dated 23.2.2011 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Class-I Dhar in criminal Case No.638/2009, dismissing the complaint of the petitioner filed under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The petition is barred by 409 days and the proper application has been moved by counsel for the petitioner vide I.A. No.3308/2012.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that accused respondent No.1 Dinesh Mehta was known to the complainant Shailendra Dubey and due to personal need had borrowed for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lac Fifty Thousand Only) from the complainant and in return had issued cheque bearing No. S.B/07-A/393134 dated 1.1.2009 to the complainant. On presentation in the bank, it was returned with remark insufficiency of funds and complainant had duly sent notice through his Counsel by Registered A.D. and Madhur courier. The accused failed to pay the said amount within the stipulated time hence the complainant, filed the complaint before the Judicial Magistrate. On trial, the trial Court dismissed the compla








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