This High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order of issuance of process under Section 138 NI Act. The Court held that since an alternative remedy exists, it would not exercise its inherent powers.
Petition dismissed with liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the Sessions Court.
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.
Mamta Kale
17-wp-4827-2022.doc
MAMTAAMARKALE Digitally signed byMAMTA AMAR KALEDate: 2024.02.2217:59:02 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 4827 OF 2022
Rahim Abdulrazak Shaikh ..Petitioner Vs. Ankur Nandlal Vishwakarma and Anr. ..Respondents ----
Mr. Hrishikesh Chavan i/b. Praneetkumar Mhaske, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Vashish Kumar Arora, for the Respondent No.1.
Mr. Kiran C. Shinde, APP for the Respondent No.2 – State.
CORAM : R. N. LADDHA, J. DATE : 22 FEBRUARY 2024
P.C.
page 1 of 2
Mamta Kale
17-wp-4827-2022.doc
R. N. LADDHA, J.
page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to exercise inherent powers given the availability of alternative efficacious remedy under Section 138 NI Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rahim Abdulrazak Shaikh
Ankur Nandlal Vishwakarma
R. N. LADDHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
