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, for invoking Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the accused is required to assign reasons in the application seeking recall and cross-examination of the complainant.
Analysis: The provision was read in light of the statutory scheme governing cheque dishonour trials and the earlier binding exposition that an affidavit filed under Section 145(1) stands as evidence and, once the opposite party applies under Section 145(2), the deponent is to be summoned for cross-examination as to the facts stated in the affidavit. The text of Section 145(2) was held not to impose any requirement that the applicant must explain why cross-examination is sought. The Court also relied on the settled view that a complainant need not repeat examination-in-chief after summoning, but may be cross-examined on the affidavit evidence when recalled.
Conclusion: The accused was not required to assign reasons for seeking recall of the complainant under Section 145(2), and the application for cross-examination ought to have been allowed.
Ratio Decidendi: Under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, once the prosecution or the accused applies for recall, the deponent of the affidavit must be summoned for cross-examination, and no additional requirement of stating reasons in the application can be read into the provision.
TaxTMI 
