Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

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