LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
LAW Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Negotiable instrument act

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 09 January 2012 This query is : Resolved 

in my matter under NI Act, one accused no.2 is absconded and one accused no. 3 advocate present for proceeding the matter,, examination-of-chief field long date before, application for attachement of property of absconder accused is pending, complainant trying to find out the detail of property. now the advocate for accused no. 3 has filed the application for tried separately or kept the said matter on dormant file.

I want to file my say on said application. what ground shall I object the said application ?
Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 09 January 2012
pls send reply on query
Arun Kumar Bhagat (Expert) 09 January 2012
It would be wise to split up the case u/s 317 Cr.P.C rather to oppose the same.
C. P. CHUGH (Expert) 09 January 2012
Who is the signatory to cheque whether accused no 2 who is absconding or accused no 3 who is facing trial. In case it is accused no 2, then without proper averments in the complaint that accused no 3 was responsible for day to day affairs and hence liable to tried under section 138 of NI Act, it would not advisable to get is split up as no case would be made out against accused no 3 who would be accquited and you will never get hold of the main accused and your case will be lost for ever. Better request the court to issue direction to co-accused to submit current address of accused no 2. Being co-accused he must be in contact with accused no 2.
prabhakar singh (Expert) 09 January 2012
yes come with reply of Mr. C.P.CHUGH Qs?
Devajyoti Barman (Expert) 09 January 2012
Yes the query needs to furnish more information to get better replies.
Deepak Nair (Expert) 10 January 2012
Follow the advise of experts. Come back with sufficienet details.
V R SHROFF (Expert) 10 January 2012
Agree with PS.
come with reply of Mr. C.P.CHUGH Qs?

u never used a word sec 138??

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 11 January 2012
Accused no. 2 signatory and accused no. 3 is patner. The fact that advocate appered with accused and filed vakalatnama and get bail. the Hon'ble Court was released the accused on bail with condition that furnish the residence proof. But the accused no.2 (absconder) take time to deposit the cash bail amount and furnish the proof of residenc address. Later on the accused advocate take exemption and pray for time to comply the order of this Hon'ble Court. After that the complainant filed Examination-in-chief and matter kept for cross. On next date the advocate withdraw the vakalatnama for accused no. 1 and 2. . after that one advocate filed a vakalatnama for accused no. 1 and 2 and orally submitted that accused under medical treatment. Later on the advocate also not present. The advocate for compllainant has taken necessary step against the accused as Warrant, Proclamation and now the application pending before the court as attachment of property. the complainant trying to seach of his property detail. now , the advocate of accused made such application for seprate the tiral or dormant filed.
Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 13 January 2012
Complainant should stick to his prayer attaching the belongings of the accused persons under law and should not allow those advocates to represent the accused persons who had either withdrawn their vakalathnama or had not appeared after filing it.
Shonee Kapoor (Expert) 13 January 2012
agreed with Ld. Mr. Makkad.


Shonee Kapoor

You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .

Click here to login now

Similar Resolved Queries :

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query