Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether issuance of process in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was sustainable without the inquiry mandated by Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 when the accused reside beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate.
Analysis: The complaint had resulted in process being issued only on the basis of the complaint, verification statements and accompanying documents. The accused were admittedly residing outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate. The governing legal position required an inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before proceeding against such accused in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Since no such inquiry had been conducted, the order issuing process could not be sustained. The separate contention relating to the role attributed to the applicants was left open for appropriate consideration before the Magistrate.
Conclusion: The requirement of inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was mandatory on the facts, and the order issuing process was unsustainable.