Manoj Nagpal VS State of Uttarakhand

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

PANKAJ PUROHIT
Manoj Nagpal – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate
For the State of Uttarakhand: Mrs. Pushpa Bhatt, learned D.A.G. along with Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. and Mr. J.P. Kandpal, learned Brief Holder
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. Devang Dobhal, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Lokendra Dobhal, learned counsel-accused person

JUDGMENT

Pankaj Purohit, J.—Vide order dated 07.05.2024, written submissions were called from learned counsel for the appellant. The same was produced on 09.05.2024, which is taken on record.

2. This is an appeal preferred by the appellant/ complainant under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) against judgment and order dated 25.11.2004 passed by learned Special Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun in Criminal Case No.1127 of 2004 Manoj Nagpal Vs. Ashok Kumar, whereby, the said Court had acquitted the respondent No.2-Ashok Kumar for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the Act’).

3. The case of the prosecution set into motion by the appellant/complainant by filing a complaint before learned trial court with the averments that the appellant lived in a joint family and the respondent No.2-accused had business relations with his brothers for the last so many years and he also had good relations with the appellant/complainant. In the first week of November 2001, respondent No.2/accused came to the appellant and expressed a need of One Lakh rupees ref