In Criminal Writ Petition No.1201 of 2013, the petitioner challenged the rejection of an application to treat Section 138 proceedings as a regular summary case. The bench distinguished cited precedent and held that there was no merit in the petition. The writ was dismissed.
The writ petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
wp1201-13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
rpa
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1201 OF 2013
Jeevan Punamchand Mehta .. Petitioner Vs. Shrilekha Nagari Sahakari Adhikosh Ltd. & Anr. .. Respondents
Mr. Sandeep D. Shinde, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. D. P. Adsule, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2 – State.
CORAM : K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.
DATED : JULY 1, 2013.
P.C. :
Heard extensively.
2 Order rejecting application Exhibit-6 in pending Appeal No.222 of 2011, passed by the learned Ad-hoc Sessions Judge-1, Nashik dated 1st March, 2013 is questioned.
3 The learned Judge in no uncertain terms illustrated, on perusal of record, as reflected in paragraphs 6 and 9 of his order about conducting the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 as regular summary
1/2
wp1201-13
case. Consequently, the Judgment in the matter of Nitinbhai Saevatilal Shah V/s. Manubhai Manjibhai Panchal & Anr., reported in ALL SCR 2011 Page 2130, will not be applicable with the force as the learned counsel desires. No merit. The writ petition is dismissed.
(K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.)
2/2
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned Sessions Judge erred in rejecting the application to treat the Section 138 proceedings as a regular summary case.
Whether the judgment in Nitinbhai Saevatilal Shah V/s. Manubhai Manjibhai Panchal & Anr. (All India Reporter 2011) is applicable to the facts of the current case.
Whether the order rejecting application letter Exhibit-6 in pending Appeal No.222 of 2011 requires writ intervention.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Nitinbhai Saevatilal Shah V/s. Manubhai Manjibhai Panchal & Anr.Distinguished¶12
Nitinbhai Saevatilal Shah V/s. Manubhai Manjibhai Panchal & Anr., ALL SCR 2011 Page 2130 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jeevan Punamchand Mehta
Shrilekha Nagari Sahakari Adhikosh Ltd. & Anr.
K. U. CHANDIWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
