TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether criminal proceedings based on the complaint disclosed any offence and whether they were liable to be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Analysis: The complaint arose from the bank's adjustment of fixed deposits furnished by guarantors against the borrower's default under the guarantee documents. The allegations, taken at face value, did not disclose the ingredients of criminal breach of trust, cheating, mischief, or conspiracy against the bank officers, who were acting to recover amounts due to the bank. The complaint was filed after the bank had already initiated recovery measures and lodged an FIR against the borrower and guarantors, indicating that the criminal process had been set in motion as a counter blast and to exert pressure on the appellants. The Magistrate had taken cognizance without proper application of mind to the complaint and supporting documents, and the High Court erred in declining to interfere despite a clear case of abuse of process.
Conclusion: The complaint did not disclose any cognizable offence against the appellants and the proceedings were liable to be quashed. The inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was required to be exercised to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice.
TaxTMI 
