Garima Jain vs.raj Kumar Singhal

Garima Jain vs Raj Kumar Singhal

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Aug 29, 2018

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1217484

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1217484
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Aug 29, 2018
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Garima Jain

Advocate Mr. A.K. Jain

Respondent

Raj Kumar Singhal

Excerpt

.....prosecution in criminal complaint case (no.259/1/15) which was instituted by the respondent on the allegations of offence under section 138, negotiable instruments act, 1881 having been committed qua the cheque statedly of the value of rupees three lakhs. the complainant was concededly examined as witness and tendered for cross-examination. the petitioner as accused later changed counsel who moved an application for recall of the said witness under section 311 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (cr.p.c.) to the effect that the cross- examination conducted was deficient and certain further questions respecting the defence of the accused had not been put. this prayer was declined by the metropolitan magistrate by order dated crl. m.c. no.1444/2016 page 1 of 2 05.10.2015. the matter was challenged before the court of sessions in revision by criminal revision (cr.r. 38/15) unsuccessfully as the said petition was dismissed on 10.02.2016. the present petition was brought thereafter to challenge the said orders of the courts below. by order dated 18.04.2016, the final judgment in the complaint case was stayed.2. having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, one more opportunity is granted for further cross-examination of the complainant but subject to costs of rs. 20,000/-, which shall be deposited with district legal services committee. upon proof of such deposit being shown to the trial court, it shall fix an appropriate date for the witness to be tendered for further cross-examination. it is made clear that no further adjournment will be sought by or granted to the petitioner for such purposes.3. the petition and accompanying application are disposed of with these observations. r.k.gauba, j.august29 2018 nk crl. m.c. no.1444/2016 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~23 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:-

"29th August, 2018 CRL. M.C. 1444/2016 & Crl. M.A. 6171/2016 GARIMA JAIN ........ Petitioner

Through: Mr. A.K. Jain, Adv. versus RAJ KUMAR SINGHAL Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is facing criminal prosecution in criminal complaint case (No.259/1/15) which was instituted by the respondent on the allegations of offence under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 having been committed qua the cheque statedly of the value of Rupees Three lakhs. The complainant was concededly examined as witness and tendered for cross-examination. The petitioner as accused later changed counsel who moved an application for recall of the said witness under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) to the effect that the cross- examination conducted was deficient and certain further questions respecting the defence of the accused had not been put. This prayer was declined by the Metropolitan Magistrate by order dated Crl. M.C. No.1444/2016 Page 1 of 2 05.10.2015. The matter was challenged before the court of sessions in revision by criminal revision (Cr.R. 38/15) unsuccessfully as the said petition was dismissed on 10.02.2016. The present petition was brought thereafter to challenge the said orders of the courts below. By order dated 18.04.2016, the final judgment in the complaint case was stayed.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, one more opportunity is granted for further cross-examination of the complainant but subject to costs of Rs. 20,000/-, which shall be deposited with District Legal Services Committee. Upon proof of such deposit being shown to the trial court, it shall fix an appropriate date for the witness to be tendered for further cross-examination. It is made clear that no further adjournment will be sought by or granted to the petitioner for such purposes.

3. The petition and accompanying application are disposed of with these observations. R.K.GAUBA, J.

AUGUST29 2018 nk Crl. M.C. No.1444/2016 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties Garima Jain vs Raj Kumar Singhal Same Subject Land Acquisition