Conviction Under Section 409 IPC Postulates Strict Proof Of Entrustment; Suspicion However Grave Cannot Substitute Proof: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Emanating From Past Matrimonial Relationship Ought Not To Linger After Divorce: Supreme Court Negligence Of Previous Counsel Not A Ground To Reopen Concluded Pre-Charge Evidence Under Section 311 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell Cannot Protect Tenant's Possession Under Section 53A Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Registered Sale Deeds Admissible As Secondary Evidence Without Proving Loss Of Original: Gauhati High Court Counsel Representing Deceased Party Must Inform Court Of Death Under Order XXII Rule 10-A CPC: J&K High Court Son Staying In Father's House Out Of Love And Affection Is A Mere Licensee, Cannot Challenge Father's Title: Delhi High Court Conviction For Murder Cannot Stand Where Single Blow Inflicted In Sudden Fight Without Premeditation: Uttarakhand High Court Inability To Trace Suppliers Or Buyers No Ground For Custodial Interrogation Once Recovery Is Effected: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Assemble Peacefully To Celebrate Association Anniversary Is A Fundamental Right; Unlawful Assembly Per Se Not An Offence: Madras High Court Marriage Photographs Can Be Relied Upon To Estimate Quantity Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court POCSO Act Not Confined To Securing Convictions, Soul Of Law Lies In Preserving Childhood Dignity & Healing: Madras High Court Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court

Non-Compliance with Section 202 CrPC: High Court Sets Aside Summoning Order in Cheque Bounce Case Involving Non-Executive Directors

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside the summoning order against several petitioners, including Non-Executive Independent Directors of M/s Housing Development Infrastructure Limited (HDIL), in a case pertaining to the dishonour of cheques under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, while delivering the judgment, emphasized the crucial aspect of jurisdiction and procedural compliance, particularly highlighting the non-compliance with Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) by the trial court.

The petitioners had approached the High Court seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 25.11.2019, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana. They argued that as Non-Executive Independent Directors, they were not involved in the day-to-day business of the accused company and had even resigned before the cheques were presented for encashment.

In his observation, Justice Brar stated, "Most of the petitioners are senior citizens and reside in Mumbai, and the drill of Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. was not followed." This was a critical point as the mandatory requirements of Section 202 were not fulfilled before issuing the process against the accused residing outside the local jurisdiction of the trial court.

The court relied on several precedents from the Supreme Court to support its decision, including the judgments in the cases of SMS Pharmaceuticals Ltd v. Neeta Bhalla and Girdhari Lal Gupta v. D.H. Mehta and another, which discuss the liability of directors not involved in the day-to-day operations of a company.

Ultimately, the High Court directed the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, to consider the matter afresh in accordance with the law, by taking recourse to Section 202 Cr.P.C. The Court also made it clear that its observations should not influence the trial court, which is to proceed uninfluenced by the High Court's observations.

Date of decision: 19.01.2024

LALIT MOHAN MEHTA AND OTHERS  VS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER         

 

Latest Legal News