https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377558 The court upheld the validity of a single complaint for multiple cheques under Section 219 of the CrPC, applying precedents allowing consolidation. It affirmed the applicability of Section 138 for cheques with "payment stopped by drawer," rejecting the argument based on insufficient funds. The court ruled that a notice for the second dishonor of cheques was not necessary, following precedent allowing prosecution for successive defaults. Petitioner No. 3 was deemed rightly accused under Section 141 as a director, with the opportunity to defend during trial. The trial court's order summoning the accused under Section 138 was upheld, dismissing the petition and instructing an unbiased adjudication. en-us Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Apr 2019 06:26:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377558 The court upheld the validity of a single complaint for multiple cheques under Section 219 of the CrPC, applying precedents allowing consolidation. It affirmed the applicability of Section 138 for cheques with "payment stopped by drawer," rejecting the argument based on insufficient funds. The court ruled that a notice for the second dishonor of cheques was not necessary, following precedent allowing prosecution for successive defaults. Petitioner No. 3 was deemed rightly accused under Section 141 as a director, with the opportunity to defend during trial. The trial court's order summoning the accused under Section 138 was upheld, dismissing the petition and instructing an unbiased adjudication. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377558