TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
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 a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 filed by a duly authorised power-of-attorney holder on behalf of the company was maintainable and whether dismissal of the complaint under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for want of locus standi was justified.
Analysis: The complaint itself described the petitioner as the authorised agent of the company and stated that he had been empowered to take steps and institute criminal proceedings for recovery of the company's dues. The governing law permits a power-of-attorney holder to file and initiate proceedings on behalf of the principal, though not in his own name as if he were the complainant. It was also recognised that such a holder may depose and verify the complaint if he has witnessed the transaction or otherwise possesses due knowledge of it, and the Magistrate may rely on the complaint and supporting affidavit at the stage of issuing process.
Conclusion: The dismissal of the complaint for want of locus standi was not justified. The complaint filed through the authorised power-of-attorney holder was maintainable, and the order under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was liable to be set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: A duly authorised power-of-attorney holder may institute criminal proceedings on behalf of the principal in relation to a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, provided the complaint is filed in the principal's name and the holder has the requisite knowledge of the transaction.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
