High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Ramesh Kumar Nagpal v. State Of U.P. And Another - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 4725 of 2006  RD-AH 9128 (8 May 2006)
Hon'ble Ravindra Singh, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that neither any debt was taken by the applicant nor thee was any liability on him for issuing the cheque to the opposite party no. 2. It is contended that an advance cheque was issued to the opposite party no. 2. The same was not honoured by the bank because there was no sufficient amount in the account of the applicant. It is further contended that date of receiving the notice by the complainant was not mentioned in the complaint. It is further contended that without recording statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr. P. C. the applicant has been summoned to face the trial. The order of summoning is illegal.
Issue notice to opposite party no. 2 returnable within a period of four weeks
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant the further proceedings in complaint case no. 6815 of 2005 under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instrument Act pending in the court of A.C. .J.M. 1St, Meerut shall remain stayed till the next date of listing.
List in the 3rd week of July, 2006
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.