RACHANA AGARWAL v. KELTECH INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ANR.
Court: High Court of Delhi
Bench: AMIT SHARMA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Delhi judgment dated 2024-01-12. RACHANA AGARWAL v. KELTECH INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ANR. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
$~19 to 22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 19 + CRL. L. P. 251/2023 RACHANA AGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashim Vachher, Mr. Vaibhav Dabas, Mr. Kunal Lakra & Mr. Vinayak Uniyal, Advocates. versus KELTECH INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Niraj Kumar Singh, Advocate (through VC). 20 + CRL. L. P. 255/2023 RACHANA AGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashim Vachher, Mr. Vaibhav Dabas, Mr. Kunal Lakra & Mr. Vinayak Uniyal, Advocates. versus KELTECH INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Niraj Kumar Singh, Advocate (through VC). 21 + CRL. L. P. 261/2023 RACHANA AGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashim Vachher, Mr. Vaibhav Dabas, Mr. Kunal Lakra & Mr. Vinayak Uniyal, Advocates. versus KELTECH INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Niraj Kumar Singh, Advocate This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/05/2024 at 12:50:48 (through VC). 22 + CRL. L. P. 266/2023 RACHANA AGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashim Vachher, Mr. Vaibhav Dabas, Mr. Kunal Lakra & Mr. Vinayak Uniyal, Advocates. versus KELTECH INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Niraj Kumar Singh, Advocate (through VC). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA O R D E R % 12. 01. 2024 1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the impugned judgment of acquittal has been passed primarily on the ground that complainant did not personally file an affidavit by way of evidence or entered into witness box for the purpose of cross-examination but the same was done through his power of attorney, i. e. , her husband. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 3.
It is not the case of the respondent that the MOU, in pursuance of which the cheques have alleged to have been issued was not entered into by the respondent and there is also no denial of the fact that the cheques were issued in pursuance of the said MOU. 4. In view of the above, the present criminal leave petitions are allowed and disposed of. The same may be registered as criminal appeals and the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/05/2024 at 12:50:48 registry is directed to number them accordingly. 5. In the meantime, respondent is directed to furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Registrar General of this Court. CRL. A.......................................... (to be numbered) CRL. A..........................................
(to be numbered) CRL. A.......................................... (to be numbered) CRL. A.......................................... (to be numbered) 6. List on 05. 04. 2024. AMIT SHARMA, J JANUARY 12, 2024/bsr This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/05/2024 at 12:50:48
Source: High Court of Delhi. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.