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…!
Union of India VS Ajoy Kumar Singh - Bombay (2022)
: The court clarified that applications under Sec. 91 for documents before framing charges are generally not maintainable, as the section is meant for investigation/trial stages, not for defense preparation.2023 0 Supreme(Kar) 1180: The court discussed the rejection of a Sec. 91 application seeking documents under the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing that such applications are generally rejected if they pertain to evidence not relied upon by the prosecution at the relevant stage.
Application in Negotiable Instruments Act Cases In cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act, Sec. 91 has been invoked to summon documents like account books or records, but courts have often rejected such applications if they are filed before charges are framed or if the documents are not part of the prosecution's evidence. The Supreme Court has emphasized that Sec. 91 is not meant for the accused to obtain documents for their defense at an early stage.References:
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 57577: The court dismissed a Sec. 91 application for production of documents, reaffirming that such requests are generally not entertained before charges are framed unless the documents are part of the prosecution's case.
Sec 91 CrPC and Witness Statements The scope of Sec. 91 does not include witness statements recorded under Sec. 161, which are considered separate from documents or things that can be summoned under this section. The courts have clarified that witness statements are not documents within the meaning of Sec. 91.References:
2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 1793: The court held that Sec. 91 excludes witness statements recorded under Sec. 161 from its scope, and cannot be summoned under this section.
Legal Limitations and Stages of Proceedings Applications under Sec. 91 are generally permissible during investigation or after framing of charges, but not at the pre-charge stage for defense purposes. The Supreme Court and various High Courts have consistently held that such applications are interlocutory and cannot be used to obtain evidence for the defense prematurely.References:
Sec. 91 CrPC primarily empowers courts and police to summon documents or things necessary for investigation or trial, but its application to the defense, especially before charges are framed, is limited. Courts have consistently held that applications under Sec. 91 for documents, particularly in Negotiable Instruments cases, are generally not maintainable at early stages unless the documents are part of the prosecution's evidence. Witness statements are explicitly excluded from the scope of Sec. 91. The legal consensus emphasizes that Sec. 91 is an investigatory and trial-stage provision, and its misuse for defense purposes at pre-charge stages is discouraged.
References:- SANJEEV S/O VISHNAPPA PUJAR vs SMT. POORNIMA W/O CHANNABASAPPA BHAVANTI Union of India VS Ajoy Kumar Singh - Bombay (2022)
In the fast-paced world of business transactions, under (NI Act) are commonplace. Defendants often seek to summon critical documents to defend their position, invoking (CrPC). But when can this be done? A pivotal query arises: Need this Case Law. This judgment, reported as , sheds light on the nuanced applicability of Section 91 CrPC in such matters, balancing with the accused's rights. This blog post delves into the ruling, key principles, and practical implications, drawing from landmark precedents and related case law.
Section 91 CrPC empowers courts or officers to issue summons for the production of any document or thing necessary or desirable for investigations, inquiries, or trials. Its purpose is to ensure justice by facilitating access to relevant evidence 2002 0 Supreme(Mad) 793. The scope is broad, allowing summons to any person in possession of such materials, but only if the court deems it essential 2002 0 Supreme(Mad) 793.
However, this power is not absolute. Courts exercise judiciously, ensuring documents are relevant and production is necessary for a fair trial 2002 0 Supreme(Mad) 793. Typically, requests under Section 91 may be allowed at any stage, but the applicant must demonstrate their pertinence 2002 0 Supreme(Mad) 793.
In cheque dishonour cases, this provision intersects with presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act, where the holder of the cheque enjoys a . Producing financial records, like account books for relevant years, can effectively rebut this 2010 0 Supreme(Mad) 4839.
A core principle from and allied rulings is that the accused's right to invoke Section 91 generally arises at the defense stage, not during . The in clarified that accused cannot seek documents to establish innocence pre-charges
.
Similarly, the case held that Section 91 (earlier Section 94) does not extend to the accused for 2022 0 Supreme(AP) 977. Witness statements under are explicitly excluded from document or other thing under Section 91 2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 1793.
This limitation was echoed in a ruling where an accused's application for mobile tower data at was rejected: The accused cannot invoke Sec. 91 to produce documents for defense before charges are framed 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 2177. The court emphasized assessing necessity based on the proceedings' stage 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 2177.
NI Act cases under Section 138 often hinge on financial evidence. highlighted that account books relating to the accused for pertinent financial years suffice to rebut Section 139's presumption 2010 0 Supreme(Mad) 4839. Legal practitioners should time requests appropriately to avoid dismissal.
Related precedents reinforce procedural rigor:- In passport seizure matters, courts mandated adherence to : The seizure of a passport must adhere to the prescribed procedures under the law 2023 0 Supreme(AP) 1255.- For cheque validity, material alterations post-six months render proceedings quashable 2000 0 Supreme(Mad) 1177.- Discrepancies in cheque numbers can lead to quashing complaints lacking foundation 2001 0 Supreme(P&H) 1017.
In another instance, a trial court allowed an IA under Section 91 post-cross-examination of the complainant, underscoring stage-specific application
.
2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 1793.
.
Additional insights from high courts:- Drug possession case: Application under Section 91 rejected pre-charges; rights deferred to defense 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 2177.- NI Act : Magistrates should prefer first in Section 138 cases 2004 0 Supreme(Mad) 393.- Pronote suits: Burden shifts to defendant post-admission of signature under NI Act 2002 0 Supreme(Mad) 130.
These rulings collectively caution against premature invocations, promoting efficient trials.
.
.
In cheque cases, verify cheque details meticulously to avert quashing 2001 0 Supreme(P&H) 1017.
Section 91 CrPC remains a vital tool for justice in NI Act litigation, as illuminated by . However, its use for the accused is typically confined to the defense stage, preventing trial delays 2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 1793. In cheque bounce scenarios, strategic production of financial documents can decisively rebut holder presumptions 2010 0 Supreme(Mad) 4839.
Key Takeaways:- Invoke Section 91 judiciously with proven necessity 2002 0 Supreme(Mad) 793.- Respect procedural timelines for accused rights
.- Leverage precedents like Padhi and Kathi Kalu for robust arguments 2022 0 Supreme(AP) 977.
Disclaimer: This post provides general information based on judicial precedents and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific guidance.
References:2022 0 Supreme(AP) 977 2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 1793
2010 0 Supreme(Mad) 4839 2002 0 Supreme(Mad) 793 2023 0 Supreme(AP) 1255 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 2177
2004 0 Supreme(Mad) 393 2002 0 Supreme(Mad) 130 2001 0 Supreme(P&H) 1017 2000 0 Supreme(Mad) 1177 #Section91CrPC, #NIACT138, #ChequeBounce
file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Hangal (vide Annexure-A) thereby allowing the IA filed by Cr.P.C. ... .482 Cr.P.C. ... Cr.P.C. ... The trial has commenced and after the cross-examination of - 3 - the complainant, accused has filed an application U/sec.91 p style="text-align: center;
. - Sec. 91 - Indian Evidence Act, 1871 - Sec. 173(5) - The court discussed the accused's right to seek production of documents at ... Finding of the Court: The court found that the accused's entitlement to seek production of documents under Sec. 91 ... Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the accused's right to seek production of documents under Sec. 91 would ordinarily not ... not o....
and re-examination of certain witnesses and under Sec.91 of the Cr.P.C, for production of certain documents, have been allowed in part. ... Rajamanickam [(2009) 5 SCC 153] (para 5), that an order passed by the trial court under Sec.311 of the Cr.P.C and under Sec.91 of the Cr.P.C, can only be an interlocutory order and therefore, revision in terms of #....
under Sec. 91 Cr.P.C. to the accused is valid under law or not? ... Whether Sec. 94 Cr.P.C. applies to the accused person or not is the question before the Five-Judge Bench of the Apex Court. Sec. 94 of old Cr.P.C. corresponds to the present Sec. 91 Cr.P.C. ... He would contend that the word "person" used in the said....
.91 of Cr.P.C., What the petitioner could not achieve in his petition under Sec.91 Cr.P.C., he now tries to reagitate it by filing a petition under Sec.243 Cr.P.C. ... The line of reasoning of the learned trial Judge is that earlier the petitioner had filed Crl.M.P.No.5722/2024 under Sec.91 Cr.P.C., seeking the very ....
Ss. 91 and 102 of Cr.P.C. read as follows: Sec. 91:Summons to produce document or other thing: (1) Whenever any Court or any officer in charge of a police station considers that the production of any document or other thing is necessary or desirable for the ... He further submitted that in the present case the passport was seized without following due procedure under law, under Ss. 91 and 102 of #HL_STA....
EVIDENCE - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973; NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 - Sec. 91, Sec. 243(2) of Cr.P.C ... .; Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act - The court discussed the provisions of Sec. 91 and Sec. 243(2) of the Cr.P.C. regarding ... Issues: Whether the trial court correctly rejected the application to summon documents under Sec. 91 and Sec ... He relied upon the judgment o....
EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.91 CRPC. ... ) Ernakulam (for short the court below) dismissing an application filed by the petitioner under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Cr.P.C.’) seeking for production of some documents for the purpose of marking it in evidence. ... EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED UNDER #HL_....
The respondent sought documents from the CBI under Sec. 91 of Cr.P.C before the framing of charges. ... CBI - Application for Documents - Sec. 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sec. 91 of Cr.P.C Fact ... Issues: Whether the accused was entitled to documents under Sec. 91 of Cr.P.C before the framing of charges. ... It does not mean that the defence has a right t....
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - APPLICATION UNDER SEC. 91 OF CrPC - CrPC Sec. 91 - The court discussed the powers under ... Sec. 91 of the CrPC, which allows a court or police officer to summon documents deemed necessary for investigation or trial. ... It concluded that the accused cannot invoke Sec. 91 to produce documents for defense before charges are framed, ....
Act is a matter of dispute between two individuals relating to civil liabilities, though it is made an offence under the Act, the Magistrate shall always use his discretion in favour of the accused and issue only a “Bailable warrant” at the first instance (i.e.) with the endorsement as provided under Sec.71, Crl.P.C. Act cases unless it is absolutely necessary and unless the Magistrate is satisfied that the respondent will not obey the bailable warrant or had absconded. Considering t....
A learned Judge of this Court Shafi, J. held in John v. George Jacob (1999(2) KLT 699) that the expression "receipt of information" used in proviso (b) to Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments In interpreting a statute the Court will be justified in reading into the statutory provision a condition which, though not expressed, is implicit as constituting the basic assumption underlying the statutory provision. Proviso (b) to Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has to b....
As such, the promissory note given by the defendant is admitted and the burden shifts upon the defendant that the writings in the promissory note were subsequently filled up and he was not borrowed the amount under the promissory note, which the defendant has not proved in this case. As the defendant is not able to prove the contrary versions with regarding to consideration, as to date as to stamps and also that holder is holder in in favour of the plaintiffs and therefore, on that score also ....
The cheques exhibited did not tally with cheque numbers given in the complaint or in the summoning order. No case under Sec.138 read with Sec.139 of the Negotiable Instruments
14. Furthermore, Sec.87 of the Negotiable Instruments
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
