2011 (1) TMI 1603 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal against the Calcutta High Court's order rejecting the appellant's revision petition under Sections 401 and 482 CrPC, which upheld the trial court's refusal to discharge the appellant in proceedings under Sections 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The High Court had held that the appellant's defense-that he was not involved in day-to-day partnership management and was abroad when the offence occurred-should be considered at trial.The Supreme Court disagreed with this aspect, holding that the appellant was entitled at the initial stage (before plea) to demonstrate lack of responsibility and absence from India during the alleged offence. Referring to *State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal*, the Court directed the High Court to examine the appellant's passport entries to verify his claim of having left India in January 2003 and not returned. The matter was remanded for fresh disposal within three months, with liberty to the High Court to proceed if the appellant fails to produce passport evidence. The stay on proceedings was extended until further orders.