Foreign portfolio investment liberalisation extends listed equity access to all individual persons resident outside India, subject to limit monitoring...
A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed through a power of attorney holder was not liable to fail merely because the complaint did not expressly plead the holder's direct personal knowledge. The Court treated the objection as an irregularity in institution, to be tested under Section 465 CrPC, and found no failure of justice because the complainant later entered the witness box, deposed to the transaction, and the accused had full opportunity to cross-examine. The conviction was therefore sustained. On sentence, the Court reduced the substantive custodial term in view of the nature and gravity of the offence, while maintaining the compensation and default clause, and substituted imprisonment till the rising of the court.
A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed through a power of attorney holder was not liable to fail merely because the complaint did not expressly plead the holder's direct personal knowledge. The Court treated the objection as an irregularity in institution, to be tested under Section 465 CrPC, and found no failure of justice because the complainant later entered the witness box, deposed to the transaction, and the accused had full opportunity to cross-examine. The conviction was therefore sustained. On sentence, the Court reduced the substantive custodial term in view of the nature and gravity of the offence, while maintaining the compensation and default clause, and substituted imprisonment till the rising of the court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
