This criminal revision was filed against an order summoning the petitioner for an alleged offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court found no illegality in the impugned order and dismissed the revision.
Criminal Revision stands 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.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1667 of 2009 (4) dt.21-01-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1667 of 2009
====================================================== Smt. Prema Devi, wife of Sri Ashok Kumar, resident of Mohalla- Ashok Bhojnalay, Orient Club, Amgola Road, P.S.- Kazimohammadpur, DistrictMuzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Vijay Kumar, Secretary, Kanchan Sewa Ashram, North of Orient Club, P.S.Kazimohammadpur, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 4 21-01-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. This criminal revision is directed against the judgment dated 15.10.2009 passed in Complaint Case No. 2883 of 2008 by the court of Sri Sahab Kausar, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Muzaffarpur, summoning the petitioner finding prima facie case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused/petitioner submits that from paragraph 2 of the complaint petition, it would appear that cheque was issued by the accused/petitioner bearing cheque no. 271881, dated 29.09.2008 for Rs. 21,004/- of Central Bank of India, but the O.P. No. 2, Vijay Kumar issued a letter to the petitioner in respect of the said cheque detailing the amount as Rs. 10,000/- which is suffice to
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1667 of 2009 (4) dt.21-01-2013
show that the allegation made in the complaint petition is false.
From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Magistrate on perusal of the complaint petition, S.A. of the complainant O.P. No. 2 and the statement of the witnesses came to the conclusion that prima facie case for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act is made out against the accused petitioner and accordingly summoned him through impugned order.
Apparently, I find no illegality in the impugned order for interference with the same in revisional jurisdiction. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision stands dismissed.
(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)
Bhardwaj/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order summoning the petitioner for an alleged offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requires interference in revisional jurisdiction.
Whether the prima facie case made out by the Learned Magistrate justifies the summons.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Prema Devi
Sahab Kausar
Vijay Kumar
The State of Bihar
Rajendra Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
