Anonymous
09 January 2011 at 17:24
I have to file a criminal case against a company for cheating and other sections of IPC. Do I need to show specific roles of MD and directors or can simply put their names. Please guide me.
Anonymous
09 January 2011 at 15:28
My father passed away and left us his office which is on the pagdi system. We tried to sell it and accordingly found a buyer and negotiated the deal with him. He paid us Rs 11,000 in cash. There was an outstanding rent payable of Rs 3750/- and for which we gave him a chq on which the name was mispelt. He took another cheque which was blank as the name of the landlord was not correctly spelt on the earlier cheque but had "Not over Rs 4,000 only" printed on it as we were travelling and the buyer was in a hurry to complete the deal as he felt the stamp duty would be levied from the 1st of Jan 2010. A few days later he issued the cheque to himself and made it out for Rs14,000. by tampering it and adding 1 before the 4000?-. Accordingly the cheque bounced. He also cancelled the sale deal and filed a case under sec 138 against us on the cheque dishonour. He sent us a notice and we tried to meet him on 2 occasions and even had an inspector approach him to settle the matter and accept Rs 11,000 but he refused and insisted that we pay him Rs 14,000.
We registered our statement at the police station. The matter is now in court and although we are willing to pay him the 14,000 he is not willing to settle what should be our defence now? He wants us now to pay him Rs 35,000/- ??
Anonymous
09 January 2011 at 15:26
My father passed away and left us his office which is on the pagdi system. We tried to sell it and accordingly found a buyer and negotiated the deal with him. He paid us Rs 11,000 in cash. There was an outstanding rent payable of Rs 3750/- and for which we gave him a chq on which the name was mispelt. He took another cheque which was blank as the name of the landlord was not correctly spelt on the earlier cheque but had "Not over Rs 4,000 only" printed on it as we were travelling and the buyer was in a hurry to complete the deal as he felt the stamp duty would be levied from the 1st of Jan 2010. A few days later he issued the cheque to himself and made it out for Rs14,000. by tampering it and adding 1 before the 4000?-. Accordingly the cheque bounced. He also cancelled the sale deal and filed a case under sec 138 against us on the cheque dishonour. He sent us a notice and we tried to meet him on 2 occasions and even had an inspector approach him to settle the matter and accept Rs 11,000 but he refused and insisted that we pay him Rs 14,000.
We registered our statement at the police station. The matter is now in court and although we are willing to pay him the 14,000 he is not willing to settle what should be our defence now? He wants us now to pay him Rs 35,000/- ??
Deepak Das
09 January 2011 at 11:44
Hi Legal experts,
I am an NRI in need of your urgent help. My father is living in india(Bihar) and is framed with false charges due to village rivarly.
An FIR is lodged with following charges
341,342,497,323,359,379,34 IPC,3(x)ST act.
Can any one help us.
Anonymous
09 January 2011 at 11:02
I have the below order passed when I filed Quashing of FIR- Writ petition with HC. Now the chargesheet is filed can I appear before the trial court basis the below order that was passed at FIR stage till then chargesheet was not filed. As the below case is still not listed before the HC so the order is still valid.
Order Extract below:
Hon'ble Imtiyaz Murtaza,J.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and also learned Additional Government Advocate.
The argument substantially is that fraught relation emanating from matrimonial bickering escalated into launching of criminal proceeding vide Case Crime No.14 of 2010 under Sections 498-A,504, 506,and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act P.S. Mahila Thana, district Allahabad.
Having considered the arguments advanced across the bar, we have a feeling that Court owes a duty to the society to strain to the utmost to repair the frayed relations between the parties so that the wounded situation may be healed into a healthy rapprochement. The matter in hand also appears to be one of those cases in which reconciliation should be tried between the disputing parties. While referring the matter to Mediation Centre with the consent of the petitioners, it is directed that the petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- with the Mediation Centre by way of Bank draft drawn in favour of Mediation Centre, High Court, Allahabad, out of which a sum of Rs.7000/- shall be payable to the respondent no.3, victim and the remaining amount shall be kept for being utilised by the Mediation Centre. The amount aforesaid, it is further directed, shall be paid over to the respondent no.3 on her appearing before the Mediation Centre on the date fixed. The amount aforesaid, it may be clarified, are meant to meet expenses to be incurred for attending mediation sessions at Allahabad for the respondent no.3 and the person escorting her. The office upon deposit of the Bank draft shall issue notice within one week to the respondent no.3, i.e the wife calling upon her to appear in the Mediation Centre at Allahabad High Court on a date to be indicated in the said notice stating therein that the Bank draft deposited by the petitioners shall be delivered in the Mediation Centre on the date fixed. The said notice shall be served upon respondent no.3 through C.J.M concerned. It needs hardly be said that both the parties shall appear either on the date fixed or on a future date as may be agreed before the Mediation Centre for reconciliation. The Centre shall submit a report within one month from the date of parties appearing before it for reconciliation. The case shall be listed in the second week of September, 2010 along with report of Mediation Centre.
In the meanwhile, the arrest of the petitioners in the aforesaid case shall remain stayed.
It may be made clear that in case, there occurs default by the petitioners either in depositing the amount or in appearing before the Mediation Centre on the date or dates fixed, the interim order staying arrest shall cease to be operative and the Mediation Centre shall immediately communicate with the office which in turn shall list the case within a week before the Bench concerned for passing appropriate order in the matter.
It may be clarified that the case will not be treated as tied up to this Bench shall be listed before the appropriate Bench. Copy of this order will not be issued unless steps are taken. Order Date :- 13.7.2010
Anonymous
09 January 2011 at 09:40
Appeal time over. After 3 years, whether possible to file SLP in SC, challenging the dismissal order by High Court in a Criminal case.
Whether SLP itself will be treated as appeal in this case?
Anonymous
09 January 2011 at 09:38
AB petition dismissed in the Sessions Court. Whether appeal lies in High Court or fresh petition u/s 438?
Anonymous
08 January 2011 at 23:11
dear
sir
i was issue legel notice ni act under section 138 to accuse within time limit
but problem was i have no mention date of cheque but mention in cheque ammount
receive from accused .
second problem was not to mention liability ammount
which was legal due?
in notice i only say i receive cheque against your legel due but not mention
my questation was notice maintanable?
Arvind Singh Chauhan
08 January 2011 at 21:35
Sir Please refer if there is any case law under Sec 321 Cr.P.C. Matter is of forged muster roll, but the case against the accused is politically motivated. State has filed application under Sec 321 for withdrawal. I am on behalf of one of 3 accused. What must be the points of argument.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Loan cheques-----138 valid or not?
I have gone through a recent Bombay High Court Judgement that cheques, which are given for security/even PDC, do not attract 138.
Does that mean a cheque, which is given to me by a friend along with a pro-note and a receipt also does not attract 138?
Does that mean cheques for discharge of any kind of loan--friendly or from banks's etc. would not attract 138?