Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2022 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 1559 - HC - Indian LawsDishonour of Cheque - reference is sought to be made under sub section (2) of Section 395 Cr.P.C. by way of which a magistrate may refer for the decision to the Hon'ble High Court any question of law arising in the hearing of a case - HELD THAT:- In terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ADALAT PRASAD VERSUS ROOPLAL JINDAL & OTHERS [2004 (8) TMI 647 - SUPREME COURT] and SUBRAMANIUM SETHURAMAN VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. [2004 (9) TMI 605 - SUPREME COURT], the Trial Court cannot be conferred with inherent powers, either to review or recall the order of issuance of process - As held in Adalat Prasad and Subramanium Sethuraman, the Magistrate is deluded with the power to revisit the order of issue of process, except to the limited extent that the Court has no jurisdiction to try the case. In other words, the Trial Court has no inherent jurisdiction to revisit the order of issue of process within the meaning of the provisions of Section 258 Cr.P.C. Further, it has been clearly held that, in any event, the provisions of Section 258 Cr.P.C. are not applicable to complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (N.I. Act). The Court of a Magistrate does not have the power to discharge the accused upon his appearance in Court in a summons trial case based upon a complaint in general, and particularly in a case under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, once cognizance has already been taken and process issued under Section 204 Cr.P.C. - Reference answered accordingly.
|