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

2007 Supreme(MP) 812

B.M.GUPTA
Shashi Shrivastava – Appellant
Versus
Jagdish Singh Kushwah – Respondent


Advocates:
A.S. Bhadauriya for petitioner.

ORDER

1. The facts, in brief, are that one complaint has been filed by the respondent against the petitioner for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and under section 420 of IPC. Cognizance under section 138 of the Act has only been taken against the petitioner vide order dated 25th February, 2002. On perusal of the complaint, it appears that the same has been filed by his Advocate putting his initials only and without the signatures of the respondents/complainant. One application dated 17th October, 2003 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner under section 245 of CrPC for quashing the complaint on the ground that the same has been filed without the signatures of the complainant. Vide reply dated 25th February, 2004, the respondent/complainant has mentioned his willingness to put his signatures on the complaint. Vide order dated 22nd August, 2005, the JMFC, Gwalior has observed that he has already taken cognizance, hence, he cannot go behind his own order. It is also observed that the objection will be considered at the time of final hearing. Feeling aggrieved, criminal revision No. 224/05 was pref











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