Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

Sect. 138 N.I. Act: Procedure Should Never Be Made a Tool to Deny Justice: Andhra Pradesh High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Andhra Pradesh High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Sri Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, has dismissed a Criminal Petition seeking to quash a complaint in a cheque fraud case. The petition, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, involved complex issues surrounding a fraudulent cheque and the misuse of a power of attorney.

The court, in its detailed observation, emphasized the importance of procedural fairness, stating, “Procedure should never be made a tool to deny justice or perpetuate injustice by any oppressive or punitive use.” This remark underscores the court’s commitment to ensuring that procedural technicalities do not overshadow substantive rights and the pursuit of justice.

The case, registered as Criminal Petition No. 2885 of 2019, centered around a complaint against the accused for issuing a colored Xerox copy of a cheque amounting to Rs. 2,50,00,000/-. The petition raised critical legal questions about the validity of actions taken under a power of attorney in criminal proceedings and the impact of procedural defects in legal processes.

Justice Rajasekhar Rao, in his ruling, referenced several landmark judgments, reinforcing the principle that the courts exist to decide on the rights of parties, not to punish them for procedural mistakes. He highlighted, “If there was an inadvertent technical violation of the rule in consequence of a bona fide mistake, and the mistake is subsequently remedied, the defect need not necessarily be fatal.”

The decision to dismiss the petition and continue with the trial process reflects the court’s approach to resolving disputes through comprehensive factual examination. The ruling is a reminder of the legal system’s role in balancing procedural requirements with the need for substantive justice.

Date of Decision: 9 November 2023

A Rafeeq vs C Vijaya

Latest Legal News