Sham Takiyavi vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 July, 2026

    0
    4
    ADVERTISEMENT

    C.A.V.On 19.06.2026 Pronounced On:20/07/2026

    1. The instant Criminal Revision is directed against the judgment

    SPONSORED

    dated 27th January, 2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions

    Judge-III, Hazaribag in Criminal Appeal No. 160 of 2014,

    whereby and whereunder, the conviction and sentence of the

    appellant passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class,

    Hazaribag in Complaint Case No. 679 of 2011/T.R. No. 3244 of

    2014 for the offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument

    Act has been upheld.

    2. Factual matrix giving rise to this revision is that both the parties

    i.e. the petitioner and opposite party No. 2 are well known to

    each other and in the month of January, 2010, the petitioner
    Criminal Revision No.907 of 2016

    2026:JHHC:21527

    received Rs. 45,500/- from the complainant for installing a

    mobile tower on his land but the petitioner-accused failed to do

    so and assured the complainant for repayment. The petitioner in

    discharge of his liability issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.

    45,500/- drawn on IDBI Bank. It is further alleged that the

    complainant presented the said cheque but the same was

    dishonoured on 26.04.2011 due to insufficient fund in the

    account of the accused-petitioner. Thereafter, the complainant

    sent legal notice through registered post on 09.05.2011 at the

    home address of the accused for repayment, but in spite of

    acknowledgement of the legal notice by the petitioner on

    12.05.2011, the accused did not pay the cheque amount to the

    complainant. Hence, the complaint was filed.



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here