Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

december 2011

Supreme Court of India · 2011-12-16

Helios & Matheson ... vs Rajeev Sawhney & Anr

Citation / case number
AIR 2012 SUPREME COURT 660
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
Helios & Matheson ...
Respondent
Rajeev Sawhney & Anr
Author
T.S. Thakur
Bench
T.S. Thakur, B.S. Chauhan

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court addressed the legality of the High Court's order setting aside the Additional Sessions Judge's ruling which had quashed the cognizance taken by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under Sections 417, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 120B of the IPC. The Court held that the Additional Sessions Judge erred in concluding that the subsequent meeting's minutes ratified the alleged fraudulent act, thereby negating the prima facie case of cheating. The Supreme Court reinstated the order of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, affirming the validity of the complaint and the cognizance taken.

Helios & Matheson ... vs Rajeev Sawhney & Anr · Niyam