Allowed

Sunil Narayan Tegninamni v. Dilip Sadashivrao Desai and Ors.

Bombay HC29 Oct 2014ALP/325/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Common order granting leave to file three independent appeals challenging an acquittal under S. 138 NI Act. The trial court found cheques were signed by a husband not as proprietor, though debt stems from an agreement signed by both respondents. Appeals admitted; process for appeal initiated with bail direction.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to file three appeals challenging acquittal; appeals admitted; process under S. 390 Cr.P.C initiated with bail direction of Rs. 500.

Sunil Narayan Tegninamni Vs Dilip Sadashivrao Desai and Ors. — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

Waghmare

¶2

13.appln.1149.2012with alp325.13 with alp326.13

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1149 OF 2012 WITH A.L.P. NO.325 OF 2013 WITH A.L.P. NO.326 OF 2013

Sunil Narayan

.. Applicant

Versus

Dilip Sadashivrao Desai & Anr. .. Respondents

¶9

Shri Amit Shete for the Applicant. Shri Anand S. Patil, for the Respondent No.1 Shri D.R. More, A.P.P. for the State.

¶10

CORAM : A.R. JOSHI, J.

¶11

DATED : 29^th OCTOBER, 2014.

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

1 Heard rival submissions on all the three applications for leave to file independent appeals challenging the judgment and order of acquittal of respondents in the matter of offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶14

2 All the three applications in three different appeals are being disposed by this common order as out of the same transaction of advance of money under some agreement, three cheques were

¶15

¶16

Waghmare

¶17

13.appln.1149.2012with alp325.13 with alp326.13

¶18

given by Respondent No.1 from the bank account of Respondent No.2 his wife and the parties are same in all the three matters.

¶19

3 The trial court came to the conclusion that the concerned cheques were given from the account of Firm and signed by the husband and not proprietor of the Firm. On this, it is argued on behalf of the applicants that the legally enforceable debt was out of the agreement between the parties and the agreement was signed by both the respondents.

¶20

4 This is a debatable issue to be dealt with in detail at the time of final hearing of the present three appeals and as such leave is granted in all the three matters to file appeal challenging acquittal of respondents. All the three appeals are admitted. Process under Section 390 of Cr.P.C be initiated against the respondent/accused with directions to the concerned Magistrate to release the respondent on bail in sum of Rs.500/.

¶21

Sunil Narayan Tegninamni v. Dilip Sadashivrao Desai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Narayan Tegninamni v. Dilip Sadashivrao Desai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivaji Shamrao Shirgure Vs Gajendra Builders and Anr.

Swastika Aluminium Architectural Systems Vs Prashant Lokhande and Anr.

Swastika Aluminium Architectural Systems Vs Prashant Lokhande and Anr.

State of Maharashtra Vs Nandkumar Pandurang Magdum

Sunil Narayan Tegninamni Vs Dilip Sadashivrao Desai and Anr.

Krushana Shahu Powar Vs Bhagirathi Automobiles and Anr.