Challenging the legality of the summoning order dated 2.9.1995, the appellant filed an application under Section 482 Cr.
There is numberhard and fast rule that the objection as to companynizability of offence and maintainability of the companyplaint should be allowed to be raised only at the time of framing the charge.
P.C. for dropping the proceedings of the private companyplaint.
P.C. in the High Court.
Such was number the intention of the High Court in passing the order dated 15.5.1996.
The High Court in passing the impugned order has virtually ignored the spirit behind the direction given and observations made in the earlier order.
The C.J.M., Indore, accordingly re affirmed the order of his predecessor in issuing the summons to the accused.
By a reasoned order dated 3.10.1996, the C.J.M., Indore, rejected the application.
Raising the very same objections at the time of framing the charge would practically be an empty formality as the trial companyrt had already taken a definite view in the matter.
Aggrieved thereby, the appellant once again moved the High Court under Section 482 Cr.
When the appellant approached the High Court again against the speaking order passed by the C.J.M., the High Court once again declined to decide the petition on merits, but left it to be raised before the trial companyrt at the time of framing the charge.
The appellant has companye up against the issue of the process.
The companyplainant also alleged that it was induced to believe by the representation of the appellant that the entire quantity would be supplied within the stipulated period on receipt of irrevocable letter of credit and on the strength of this representation, the companytract was entered into.
Thereafter, the C.J.M., Indore, passed an order overruling the objections and decided to proceed with the case.
The appellant, if aggrieved, by any adverse orders passed against it, shall have right to challenge the same in accordance with law.
Venkatarama Reddi, J. Leave granted and the appeal heard on merits.
The appellant then filed objections before the C.J.M., Indore, and sought for dropping the proceedings.
On an earlier occasion when the appellant moved the High Court, the High Court directed the C.J.M., Indore, to companysider the objections raised by the appellant and to pass a reasoned order.
It is against this order that the present SLP has been filed.
