Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Even in serious offences, exemptions are possible, but courts must ensure that these do not cause unnecessary delays or abuse of process ["SMT. MISRIYA Vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"] ["SMT. MISRIYA Vs STATE OF KERALA - Kerala"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
Imagine a pregnant woman, navigating the challenges of impending motherhood, suddenly summoned to court for a cheque bounce case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act. Must she appear personally, risking her health? Or can courts grant exemption? This is a common concern for many facing such proceedings.
Even under Section 138 NI Act matters, the accused can be granted exemption from personal appearance for pregnant women. Courts have consistently recognized this discretion, balancing justice with humanitarian considerations. In this post, we delve into the legal framework, key judgments, and practical guidance.
Section 138 of the NI Act deals with cheque dishonour, a technical offence often resulting in summons cases. Under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), particularly Section 205, magistrates have discretion to exempt accused from personal appearance, allowing representation by counsel.
Courts emphasize that personal appearance isn't absolute in these cases. As noted in Vivek Nagpal VS Oriental Bank of Commerce - Dishonour Of Cheque (2005), the discretion of the court to grant exemption from personal appearance should be exercised only in rare instances with good reasons, and health or hardship are valid grounds.
This principle extends to various hardships, including health issues, old age, or distance Arun D. Deshpande VS Vipin Oil Extraction (P) Ltd. - Dishonour Of Cheque (2002)Pankajbhai Nagjibhai Patel VS State Of Gujarat - 2001 1 Supreme 124.
Pregnancy qualifies as a significant health-related hardship. While no statutory provision explicitly lists it, judicial precedents support exemptions.
In a pivotal Kerala High Court case SMT. MISRIYA Vs STATE OF KERALA - 2007 Supreme(Online)(KER) 19567, the petitioner, a pregnant woman facing Section 138 charges, sought relief from a non-bailable warrant. The court held: The court clarified that personal appearance ... of the accused is not always necessary in Section 138 cases, allowing for counsel representation and application for exemption. It stayed the warrant, directing her to apply for exemption under Section 205 CrPC, recognizing pregnancy as a valid circumstance.
Similarly, S. Nalini Jayanthi VS M. Ramasubba Reddy - 2022 0 Supreme(SC) 1683 acknowledged a woman's status, granting exemption considerations, indicating sensitivity towards women's special conditions, extendable to pregnancy.
Another judgment SHAKUNTALA VS VIRUPANNA S - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 611 stressed a liberal and humane approach in granting exemption from personal attendance to women accused, considering social and religious factors. The court allowed exemption unless essential for justice.
Courts balance accused rights with prosecution interests:- Discretion is Judicial: Exemptions aren't automatic but require good cause Vivek Nagpal VS Oriental Bank of Commerce - Dishonour Of Cheque (2005).- No Prejudice to Prosecution: Ensure trials proceed smoothly TGN Kumar VS State of Kerala - 2011 1 Supreme 559.- Evidence Recording: Possible via counsel under Section 273 CrPC, even for Section 313 examination via written statements TGN Kumar VS State of Kerala - 2011 Supreme(Ori) 25.
In Ajay Kumar Bisnoi VS KEI Industries Limited - 2015 Supreme(Mad) 2960, for busy businessmen in NI Act cases, the court dispensed with appearance, noting: the absence of the petitioners will not hamper the progress of the case, that too in 138 N.I. Act proceedings.
For women, AMUL GABRANI vs M/S.KEI INDUSTRIES LIMITED REP referenced Section 273 CrPC for dispensing personal appearance in appropriate cases.
Exemptions have boundaries:- Not Routine: Must be judicious; courts may demand proof like medical certificates Vivek Nagpal VS Oriental Bank of Commerce - Dishonour Of Cheque (2005).- Essential Stages: Personal presence may be required for compounding or key hearings SHAKUNTALA VS VIRUPANNA S - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 611.- Procedural Safeguards: Warrants can't be issued hastily; follow Sections 82-83 CrPC Surendra Sharma S/o Sardul Sharma VS State Of Rajasthan, Through PP - 2024 Supreme(Raj) 423.
In A. K. Pandya VS State of Rajasthan - 2014 Supreme(Raj) 255, courts rejected exemptions without proof of ailments or distance, directing appearance.
NITU RANI VS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) - 2015 Supreme(Del) 3306 affirmed: granting of exemption from personal appearance is the discretion of the Court.
If you're a pregnant woman facing Section 138 proceedings:1. File Prompt Application: Under Section 205 CrPC, supported by medical proof.2. Highlight Hardships: Emphasize pregnancy risks, travel difficulties.3. Engage Counsel: For representation and arguments.4. Seek Interim Relief: Stay warrants if needed, as in SMT. MISRIYA Vs STATE OF KERALA - 2007 Supreme(Online)(KER) 19567.
Legal practitioners should cite precedents like health exemptions Arun D. Deshpande VS Vipin Oil Extraction (P) Ltd. - Dishonour Of Cheque (2002) and women's liberal approach SHAKUNTALA VS VIRUPANNA S - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 611.
Indian courts increasingly adopt humane approaches in summons cases. Guidelines from cases like Bhaskar Industries (2001) stress avoiding harassment while preventing delays.
In NI Act trials, focus remains on complainant's burden, reducing accused presence needs Ajay Kumar Bisnoi VS KEI Industries Limited - 2015 Supreme(Mad) 2960.
Generally, courts may grant pregnant women exemption from personal appearance in Section 138 NI Act cases, exercising discretion under CrPC provisions. This upholds justice without undue hardship.
Key Takeaways:- Pregnancy is a valid ground, akin to other health issues.- Back applications with evidence.- Exemptions balance both parties' interests.
This post provides general information based on judicial trends and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your specific situation.
Stay informed, and prioritize well-being amid legal challenges.
#Section138NIAct, #ChequeBounce, #PregnantAccused
And Ors [2001 (7) SCC 401] in a summons case, involving offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, where the accused was seeking exemption from personal appearance. ... The court must ensure that the exemption from personal appearance granted to an accused is not abused to delay the trial.” (Emphasis supplied) 16. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Puneet Dalmia....
138 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 9, 12, 13(2) and 13(1)(c) and (d) - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 14 ... Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 205, 437, (3) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 406, 423, 120B, 34 - Negotiable Instruments Act - Section ... Unless there are exceptional grounds, the exemption from personal appearance for the first appearance cannot be granted. ... the applications submitted by him under section 205 o....
Warrant - Prosecution - Negotiable Instruments Act, Section 138; Cr.P.C., Section 205 - The court clarified that personal appearance ... of the accused is not always necessary in Section 138 cases, allowing for counsel representation and application for exemption. ... Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the necessity of personal appearance is not absolute in cases under Section 138, noting ... If the petitioner, a woman, is pregnant and she is facing allegation only....
The Supreme Court granted exemption from personal appearance in case of Bhaskar Industries Ltd. (supra) in which offences was under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act whereas in the case of Puneet Dalmia (supra) it was under more serious offences. ... exempt an accused from personal appearance. ... The Magistrate is empowered to record the plea of the accused even when....
The Supreme Court granted exemption from personal appearance in case of Bhaskar Industries Ltd. (supra) in which offences was under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act whereas in the case of Puneet Dalmia (supra) it was under more serious offences. ... Even then the Supreme Court proceeded on the aforesaid principles and allowed exemption from personal appearance to the appellant before....
138 of the N.I. ... 138 of the N.I. ... appearance of an accused in a case under Section 138 of the N.I. ... , however, Section 273 Cr.P.C. envisages that in appropriate cases, the personal appearance of the accused could be dispensed with the presence of the counsel as enabled by Section p style="position:absolute;white-space:
Section 138 - Exemption from Personal Attendance - Section 273, Section 313, Section 317, Section 353, and Section 205 of the ... The application under Section 205, Cr. P. C. filed by the petitioner in the Court below is allowed. The petitioner is granted exemption from personal appearance during her trial in C. C. ... ( 1 ) RESPONDENT is a private complainant and petitioner is the accused in C. C. No. 606/98 on the file of the Court below wherein th....
Negotiable Instruments Act – Section 138 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Sections 200, 215, 205, 317 ... P.C. against the petitioners herein before the Fast Tract Court-II/Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore for punishing them under Section ... 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, for having committed dishonour of cheques. – The said complaint were taken on file by the trial ... The Court must ensure that the exemption from personal appearance granted....
AIR 2001 SC 3625 ], the Apex Court held that Section 205 (1) of Cr.P.C. permits the Magistrate to enable an accused to get permanent exemption from appearance on the following conditions: (1) accused shall undertake ... This Court further observed that ordinarily the Court should be generous and liberal under Sections 205 and 317 of Cr.P.C. and grant exemption to the accused from personal appearance unless the presence is imperativ....
The petitioner sought to quash an order issuing a non-bailable warrant against him due to his non-appearance in a case under Section ... His non-appearance was clearly not intentional and the learned Court below ought to have looked into the same before summarily rejecting the stand taken in the application seeking exemption from personal presence. ... His application seeking exemption from personal presence was dismissed abruptly on 08/11/23 resulting in an arrest warrant. ... #HL_STA....
Therefore, there is no perversity or illegality in above order as well. It is not disputed that granting of exemption from personal appearance is the discretion of the Court and if the Court deem fit, exemption can be granted to accused persons.
Evidence can be recorded in a trial under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in the presence of the counsel as enabled by Section 273 CrPC when the accused is exempted from personal appearance and for that purpose, the personal presence of the accused shall not be insisted. The power and the obligation to question the accused to enable him to explain the circumstances appearing in evidence against him must oblige the court in such situation to accept and consider the written statement made by the accused. (iv) Examination under Section 313(1)(b) CrPC can be dispe....
iv) Examination under Section 313(b) Cr.P.C can be dispensed with under the proviso to Section 313(1) and if the accused files a statement explaining his stand, the same can be received by the court notwithstanding the absence of a provision similar to Section 233 and 243 Cr.P.C in the procedure for trial in a summons case. iv) Examination under Section 313(b) Cr.P.C can be dispensed with under the proviso to Section 313(1) and if the accused files a statement explaining his stand, the same can be received by the court notwithstanding the absence of a provision similar to Section 233 and 243....
(iii)Evidence can be recorded in a trial under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in the presence of the counsel as enabled by Section 273 Cr.P.C when the accused is exempted from personal appearance and for that purpose, the personal presence of the accused shall not be insisted. (iv)Examination under Section 313(b) Cr.P.C can be dispensed with under the proviso to Section 313(1) and if the accused files a statement explaining his stand, the same can be received by the court notwithstanding the absence of a provision similar to Section 233 and 243 Cr.P.C in the ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
