Parkash Chand v. Gaya Prasad
Case brief
What is this about?
No. of 2017 22.06.2017 Present: Mr. Jeevesh…
A compact analysis
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.
22.06.2017
Cr. Revision No. of 2017 Present: Mr. Jeevesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Kashyap, Advocate for the respondent.
Cr.M.P(M) No. 313 of 2017
Having gone through the contents and the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 93 days as occurred in filing the main petition seems to be neither intentional nor deliberate and rather stands duly explained. Being so, this application is allowed and the delay as occurred in filing the main petition is condoned. The application stands disposed of.
Cr. Revision No. of 2017
The bank draft in the sum of `47,000/- placed
in ‘B’ part of the file be got encashed and the amount in question be invested in fixed deposit. Send for the records. List on 17th August, 2017.
Cr.M.P No. 234 of 2017
The petitioner is a convict. He has been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and also to pay a fine of `2,00,000/- as compensation by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Shimla, vide judgment dated 27.06.2015/24.08.2015 passed in RBT Case No. 543/3 of 2014-12. Learned lower appellate Court in
Coram
Dharam Chand Chaudhary
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Himachal Pradesh HC
- Decided on
- · June
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRMPM/313/2017
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court