Bom HC | For the offence of cheating under Penal Code, 1860, is intention of cheating important from inception? Read on
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of V.K. Jadhav and Shrikant D. Kulkarni, JJ., observed that, “…in the case of cheating, the
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of V.K. Jadhav and Shrikant D. Kulkarni, JJ., observed that, “…in the case of cheating, the
Allahabad High Court: Dr Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J., refused to exercise and inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash a complaint
Chhattisgarh High Court relied on Supreme Court judgment In re: Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act 1881,
Madras High Court: P. Velmurugan, J., addressed a matter revolving around the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. A
Here’s a short recap of what we covered under the High Court’s section on the SCC Online Blog for the month of
Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., addressed a matter with regard to offences under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Instant
Allahabad High Court: Vivek Varma, J., held that factum of disputed service of notice requires adjudication on the basis of evidence and
Allahabad High Court: Vivek Varma, J., refused to quash a complaint case filed under Section 138 NI Act and directed the trial
Jammu and Kashmir High Court, Srinagar: Sanjeev Kumar, J., while addressing a matter in respect to Section 138 NI Act, stated that
Gujarat High Court: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J., compounded an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and set aside the
“Such conversion of complaints under Section 138 from summary trial to summons trial has been contributing to the delay in disposal of the cases.”
Delhi High Court: Rajnish Bhatnagar, J., held that: “Once a cheque is issued by a person, it must be honored and if
Kerala High Court: K. Haripal, J., addressed the instant complaint instituted by the appellant alleging offence punishable under Section 138 of the
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): The Division Bench of Venugopal M (Judicial Member) and Alok Srivastava (Technical Member) held that a
by Anunoy Basu* and Shounak Mukhopadhyay**
Allahabad High Court: Ravi Nath Tilhari, J., addressed a matter wherein a person being the director of the company signed a cheque
Madras High Court: P.N. Prakash, J., decided a criminal original petition addressing an issue with regard to an offence under Section 138
Delhi High Court: Suresh Kumar Kait, J., reversed the order of the lower court issuing summons against the accused in a case
Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., addressed a matter wherein it was reiterated that the initial burden of proving the burden of
Punjab and Haryana High Court: Arun Kumar Tyagi, J., addressed a petition challenging the impugned order of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class of