Search results
Jan 11, 2018 · Due to the aforesaid harassment and nuisance the appellant made a complaint to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, who directed the Administrative Officer to file his report on the complaint of the appellant.
Jan 4, 2023 · The order of acquittal was questioned before the High Court in appeal. By a judgment dated 28-11-2018, the High Court has allowed the appeal and convicted the appellant for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act awarding a sentence of a fine in the amount of Rs 3 lakhs.
Authority to show cause as to why he deliberately lodged an F.I.R. when there is specific provision for prosecuting the accused by lodging a complaint. The explanation and action taken against him, shall be forwarded to the Court by the Competent Authority within 8 weeks from today through Registrar General of this Court who
- Introduction
- Brief Facts of The Case
- Conclusion
The Supreme Court of India (the Court) had in the judgment titled J. Vedhasingh v. R.M. Govindan1 referred to a larger Bench the question as to whether an accused can be tried based on a similar set of facts for an offence under Section 1382 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the NI Act) as well as an offence such as Section 4203 under the Pe...
In J. Vedhasingh10, the appellant had lodged a complaint against Respondents 1 to 4 under Sections 120-B11, 40612, 420 and 3413 IPC after filed a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act. The Madras High Court had quashed the institution of the case under Sections 120-B, 406, 420 and 34 IPC pending against the Respondents 1 to 4 ruling that the co...
The reference to a larger Bench in J. Vedhasingh45 provides the Court with an opportunity to definitively answer as to whether the institution of a complaint under IPC after a complaint has been filed under the NI Act would be hit by the bar of Section 300 CrPC or not. As seen above, the applicability of the bar of double jeopardy is conditional on...
Court in Upkar Singh has clearly stated that any further complaint by the same complainant against the same accused, after the case has already been registered, will be deemed to be an improvement from the original complaint. Though Upkar Singh was rendered in the context of a case involving cognizable
complaint under Section 138 of NI Act, a petition under Section 482 before the High Court was filed for quashment of the complaint which was dismissed.
People also ask
Why did Jharkhand Supreme Court dismiss Patel's quashing order?
Did Ajay Kumar Singh register a fraud case against Ameesha Patel?
Why did respondent 2 file a complaint in sangeetaben mahendrabhai22?
Is the impugned order vacated in Surinder Singh Deswal case?
Jun 18, 2023 · According to the complaint, Singh had transferred Rs 2.5 crore to the actor's bank account for the production of a movie titled "Desi Magic". Patel, however,...
