Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.42 seconds)
Documents citing Mrs. Monica Gogia vs State And Ors. on 16 February, 2005

Bhaskar Chandra Jaina vs . Dheeraj Bajaj on 1 June, 2009

1. Vide this order, I will dispose off two applications filed by the accused one u/s 294 Cr.P.C. and another u/s 91 Cr.P.C. and the brief facts necessary for these disposal are that the accused was summoned for the offence punishable u/s 138 NI Act and notice u/s 251 Cr.P.C. has not been served upon the accused but he has filed these two applications, one filed u/s 294 Cr.P.C. for admission/denial of certain documents and another filed u/s 91 Cr.P.C. seeking production of certain documents from the complainant. Ld. Counsel for the accused submits that the story of the complainant that he advanced a loan of Rs.1.50 Lacs to the accused in discharge of which the cheques in question were issued and his story in the second complaint that the cheques in question were issued after settlement of account of their company is a cock and bull story and to prove truth on record, the complainant is required to admit or deny the bills, statement of account, rent agreement, resignation letters of the complainant and the accused, prior to proceeding further in this case and further, is required to produce his income tax returns, the details of his purchasers, documents of settlement of account etc. to prove that the cheques in question were never issued for discharge of liability, but were handed over to the complainant for purchasing raw material for the business of the company and as such these applications are required to be allowed to prove the defence of the accused. Ld. Counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, has submitted that at the stage of notice, documents of the accused cannot be considered which are required to be proved in his defence and the applications under consideration are only a delaying tactics and should be dismissed for which he has placed reliance upon the Judgment titled as "Monika Gogia Vs. State" reported in 20005 (2) JCC (NI) 117.
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mr. Vinod Vij (Director) vs M/S Om Prakash Prem Chand & Co on 4 January, 2007

He has also relied upon the judgment of our own High Court in the matter of Mrs. Monica Gogia vs. State & ors. 2005 (2) C.C. Cases (HC) 215 wherein it was held that at the stage of charge, evidence and documents produced by the accused cannot be taken into account and the same principal is to be applied at the stage of issuing summons, so no interference can be made.
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1