DOLE RAJ THAKUR Vs. PANKAJ PRASHAR
LAWS(HPH)-2018-1-82
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Decided on January 06,2018

Dole Raj Thakur Appellant
VERSUS
Pankaj Prashar Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

VINAY KUMAR VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ANR. [REFERRED TO]
N.K. SHARMA VS. M/S ACCORD PLANTATIONS PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANY LIMITED VS. KESHVANAND [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD AZEEM VS. A VENKATESH [REFERRED TO]
S ANAND VS. VASUMATHI CHANDRASEKAR [REFERRED TO]
BOBY VS. VINEETKUMAR [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Vivek Singh Thakur, J. - (1.)This appeal has been preferred against impugned order, dated 27th June, 2017, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Manali (hereinafter referred to as "Magistrate") in Criminal Case No. 13I/2012/35III/2012, whereby the complaint filed by appellantDole Raj Thakur against respondentPankaj Prashar under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as "NI Act"), came to be dismissed in default for nonpresence and nonprosecution, when the case was listed for arguments.
(2.)It Is Apt To Reproduce The Impugned Order Herein: JUDGEMENT_82_LAWS(HPH)1_2018_1.html
(3.)In view of Section 143 of the NI Act, offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is to be tried summarily and accordingly, procedure for summons case provided in Chapter XX of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "CrPC") is applicable during the trial initiated on filing a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act. In this Chapter, Section 256 CrPC deals with a situation of nonappearance of death of complainant.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.