https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384756 Interference with an order issuing process in a cheque dishonour complaint was declined because the record disclosed a joint loan transaction, with both petitioners named in the loan documents, notices and account particulars, and the cheque was alleged to have been issued towards repayment of that liability. The Magistrate had proceeded after following the procedure under Sections 200, 202 and 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the Court said it was inappropriate at the summoning stage to appreciate evidence in writ or inherent jurisdiction. Pendency of SARFAESI measures was held not to create any legal bar to continuation of the criminal complaint. en-us Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Aug 2019 07:24:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384756 Interference with an order issuing process in a cheque dishonour complaint was declined because the record disclosed a joint loan transaction, with both petitioners named in the loan documents, notices and account particulars, and the cheque was alleged to have been issued towards repayment of that liability. The Magistrate had proceeded after following the procedure under Sections 200, 202 and 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the Court said it was inappropriate at the summoning stage to appreciate evidence in writ or inherent jurisdiction. Pendency of SARFAESI measures was held not to create any legal bar to continuation of the criminal complaint. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384756