Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.26 seconds)Section 23 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 24 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Joginder Singh vs Naresh Kumar And Others on 28 July, 2009
31. In view of the discussion made above, the
present petition is allowed. The notice of accusation, as
well as, the complaint bearing Case No.175III/2019, titled
as Joginder Singh versus Naresh Kumar, filed under
Section 138 of the NI Act, against the petitioner, pending
before the trial Court, are ordered to be quashed.
The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Madhavrao Jiwaji Rao Scindia & Anr. Etc vs Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre & Ors. ... on 9 February, 1988
15. A three Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court,
in Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia versus Sambhajirao
Chandrojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC, 692, has held, as
under:
"7. The legal position is well settled that
when a prosecution at the initial stage is
asked to be quashed, the test to be applied
by the court is as to whether the
uncontroverted allegations as made prima
facie establish the offence. It is also for the
court to take into consideration any special
features which appear in a particular case to
consider whether it is expedient and in the
interest of justice to permit a prosecution to
continue. This is so on the basis that the
court cannot be utilized for any oblique
purpose and where in the opinion of the
court chances of an ultimate conviction are
bleak and, therefore, no useful purpose is
::: Downloaded on - 13/10/2023 20:37:51 :::CIS
10
likely to be served by allowing a criminal
prosecution to continue, the court may while
taking into consideration the special facts of
.
Smt. Sunitha Gudniya vs The State Of Telangana And Another on 19 September, 2022
29. Payment of money for the illegal purpose is
against the public policy and Hon'ble Apex Court in B.
rt
Sunitha versus State of Telangana & Another, AIR
2017 (Supreme Court) 5727, has held that, if the object is
illegal, then the complaint, under Section 138 of the NI Act,
is not maintainable. Relevant paragraphs 18 and 19 of the
judgment, are reproduced, as under:
"18. Thus, mere issuance of cheque by the
client may not debar him from contesting the
liability. If liability is disputed, the advocate
has to independently prove the contract.
1