High Court of Bombay, Goa allowed a criminal misc. application granting leave to appeal against an acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, noting findings were contrary to evidence.
Leave to appeal granted against the judgment acquitting the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1884.
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.
CRMA 23 of 2022
vinita
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.23 OF 2022 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.41 OF 2022 (F)
CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.23 OF 2022 DHARMENDRA WADKAR ... APPLICANT
Versus
SUPRIYA @ GEETA SUBHASH WADKAR ... RESPONDENT
WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.41 OF 2022 (F) DHARMENDRA WADKAR ... APPELLANT Versus SUPRIYA @ GEETA SUBHASH WADKAR ... RESPONDENT
Mr O. Kulkarni, Advocate for the applicant through VC.
CORAM:- AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J. DATED :- 18th March, 2024
P.C.
The application seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 11.11.2021 acquitting the non-applicant of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1884. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that findings are contrary to the evidence on record, considering which leave is granted.
AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
VINITA VIKAS NAIK Digitally signed by VINITA VIKAS NAIK Date: 2024.03.18 14:48:28 +05'30'
Page 1 of 1
18th March, 2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether leave to appeal must be granted to consider findings contrary to evidence in a cheque dishonour case.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
DHARMENDRA WADKAR
SUPRIYA @ GEETA SUBHASH WADKAR
AVINASH G. GHAROTE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
