Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.23 seconds)
Documents citing Shri Mohd. Sharif & Anr. vs Mohd. Shamim & Anr. on 16 November, 2011

In Re: Mohd. Mehfooj vs Mohd. Shamim on 4 November, 2022

accused during the course of trial pleas of defence were taken by has to be proved stion having been a stolen cheque Further the fact of cheque in que in the present case any cogent evidence. However, by the accused himself by leading about the cheque in the court that he came to know accused himself deposed before having been hav ing been pres ente d by complainant and the same question t to him by the the legal demand notice sen dishonoured when he received plaint regarding his take any action or filed any com complainant but still he did not person is having blank ther, it is hard to believe that a cheque having been stolen. Fur he got the same back, he left it somewhere and when signed cheques in his bag and and if his entire bag g from his bag is missing or not he did not even check if anythin e only despite knowing not take any action at that tim was missing then why did he µ;·c1.~· ~ Page l I of 18 CC No .205/202 l Mohd. Mchfooj Vs. Mohd. Shamim defence taken by ng his bla nk sig ned cheques. So the plea of at the same was carryi of nce since the action to be va gu e wi tho ut any tenable substa accuse d appears not even ue as alleg ed by him , seems absurd as he did cheq acc used qua his stolen ainst him by the mp lai nt aft er filing of the present case ag bother to file any co complainant.
Delhi District Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1