Legal Question in Criminal Law in India

cheque bouncing 138

i had lodged a case on a partnership firm. the notice ws sent to the firm as accused no 1 and one person accused no 2. after many dates when in crossing the opponents lawyer produced a partnership deed in which the accused no 2 is not a partner and 3 other brothers are partners. my lawyer put an application to the metropolitan magistrate tht under crpc 319 add the names of the 3 as accused no 3, 4 , 5 respecfuly.the magistrate did add and summond the 3 bt they never appeared . the summons were pated on their premises and still they didnt come so the metropolitan magistrate issued NBW against the 3. they appointed a lawyer and the lawyer went to sessions court and gt a stay on the case and the NBW. saying tht the 3 were nt sent any notices and their names cannot be added afterwards. for hearing i ws asked to appear in seccions court on 16dec bt the 3 others and their lawyer didnt appear. in seccions the magistrate gave date of 20jan. the metropolitan magistrate had given date of 20th dec since the seccions judge had given stay till 16th dec. i would like to know where does my case stand with ths background wht i gave u.. pls would be very thankfull if u would give me an advise on ths..


Asked on 12/17/06, 2:17 pm

1 Answer from Attorneys

Re: cheque bouncing 138

Dear sir,

You have a good case.The magistrate had rightly issued the notice and NBW there after when accused has failed to appear.since matter is pending in session court so it will be rightful to put all these facts available on record to prove that the accused were properly sent notice in the case for their names impleaded in the matter.Accused had probebly misleaded the court in order to get stay.you must have to contest matter in session court to get the accused punished by trial court.

for any other query/assistance cal on my mobile.

thanks.

siddharth

Read more
Answered on 12/17/06, 9:07 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Criminal Law questions and answers in India