AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Umesh A. Trivedi, J
Mr. Tejas P. Satta, learned advocate for the respondent No. 2 has filed a sick-note.
However, it appears that respondent No. 2 herein has, despite order in his favor dated 16.01.2023 granting him suspension of sentence pending his appeal before the appellate Court on his willingness to deposit 20% of the cheque amount shown to be deposited on 17.01.2023, came out with the novel idea of misleading even the appellate Court showing deposit being made in the Criminal Case for cheque return, which prima facie appears to be incorrect.
Respondent No. 2 herein is hereby directed to personally remain present before this Court on 15.09.2023.
Mr. Tejas P. Satta, learned advocate for respondent No. 2, though on sick-note, shall see that respondent No. 2 remains present before this Court on 15.09.2023 or else appropriate orders shall be passed on that day.
Hence, stand over to 15.09.2023.
Registry is directed to immediately communicate this order to Mr. Tejas P. Satta, learned advocate for respondent No. 2.