REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

NARESH KUMAR Appellant

V/S

Shimla Fruit Agency Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

INDUS AIRWAYS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS MAGNUM AVIATION PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
HAMID MOHAMMAD VERSUS JAIMAL DASS [REFERRED TO]
MADAN AND CO VS. WAZIR JAIVIR CHAND [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. ATMARAM SUNGOMAL POSHANI [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ADMINISTRATION BANGALORE VS. V K GURURAJ [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA MANAGING DIRECTOR WESTERN INDIA PLYWOODS VS. PUTTUMANA ILLATH JATHAVEDAN NAMBOODIRI:PUTHUMANA ILLATH JATHAVEDAN NAMBOODIRI [REFERRED TO]
K R INDIRA VS. G ADINARAYANA [REFERRED TO]
C C ALAVI HAJI VS. PALAPETTY MUHAMMED [REFERRED TO]
SARAV INVESTMENT AND FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS PVT LTD VS. LLYODS REGISTER OF SHIPPING INDIAN OFFICE STAFF PROVIDENT FUND [REFERRED TO]
POONAM VERMA VS. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA JANARDHAN BHAT VS. DATTATRAYA G HEGDE [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. C N VASUDEVAN [REFERRED TO]
V N BHARAT VS. D D A [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LUDHIANA VS. INDERJIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
SOUTHERN SALES AND SERVICES VS. SAUERMILCH DESIGN AND HANDELS GMBH [REFERRED TO]
MANDVI CO OP BANK LTD VS. NIMESH B THAKORE [REFERRED TO]
GREATER MOHALI AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. MANJU JAIN [REFERRED TO]
R VIJAYAN VS. BABY [REFERRED TO]
AMIT KAPOOR VS. RAMESH CHANDER [REFERRED TO]
SANJAYSINH RAMRAO CHAVAN VS. DATTATRAY GULABRAO PHALKE [REFERRED TO]
DON AYENGIA VS. THE STATE OF ASSAM & ANR. [REFERRED TO]
SAMPELLY SATYANARAYANA RAO VS. INDIAN RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
KISHAN RAO VS. SHANKARGOUDA [REFERRED TO]
BIR SINGH VS. MUKESH KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
APS FOREX SERVICES PVT. LTD. VS. SHAKTI INTERNATIONAL FASHION LINKERS [REFERRED TO]
M/S. KALAMANI TEX AND ANOTHER VS. P. BALASUBRAMANIAN [REFERRED TO]
SUMETI VIJ VS. PARAMOUNT TECH FAB INDUSTRIES [REFERRED TO]
VISHWABANDHU VS. KRISHNA [REFERRED TO]
MALKEET SINGH GILL VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. DILIPSINH KISHORSINH RAO [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision is directed against the jud ment dtd. 10/3/2025 passed by learned Additional Sess ons Judge (CBI Court), Shimla (learned Appellate Court), vide which the judgment of conviction dtd. 22/7/2024 and order of sentence dtd. 30/7/2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Shimla, H.P. (learned trial Court) were upheld. (The parties shall hereinafter be referred in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned trial Court for convenience).

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the complainant filed a complaint before the learned Trial Court for the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ( for short "NI Act") . It was asserted that the complainant is a partnership firm, which is duly registered with the Regist ar of Firms. The Firm deals in agricultural and hortic lt ral products. The accused purchased vegetable seeds worth Rs.2,95,000.00. He paid Rs.80,000.00 in cash and issued two post-dated cheques for the sum of Rs.1,00,000.00 and Rs.1,15,0000.00respectively towards the repayment of the amount. The complainant presented the cheques to the bank, but these were dishonoured with an endorsement "funds Insufficient". The complainant sent a legal notice to the accused, but the accused refused to receive it. He did not make any payment to the complainant; hence, a complaint was filed before the learned Trial Court to take action against the accused, as per the law.

(3.) Learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused appeared, a notice of accusation was put to him for the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

Click here to view full judgment.

NARESH KUMAR Vs. SHIMLA FRUIT AGENCY

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address