Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

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