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

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 3509

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
OM PARKASH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER – Respondent


1. The challenge in the present criminal revision is to the order dated 05.03.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, dismissing the appeal preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 24.04.2023 and order of sentence dated 25.04.2023 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sirsa, vide which the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (for short, ‘the Act’) and to pay compensation.

2. The facts relevant as narrated in the complaint filed under Section 138 of the NI Act are that the accused had issued post dated cheque dated 31.12.2014, amounting to Rs.10 lakh, in favour of the complainant. However, on presentation thereof, the same was dishonoured and returned with the remarks “Insufficient Funds”. Despite issuance of legal notice, the petitioner failed to make the payment within the stipulated period. The proceedings against him were initiated under Section 138 of the NI Act, pursuant to which, he appeared and was released on bail. On finding prima facie case under Section 138 of the NI Act, notice of accusation was served upon him, to which he plea

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