<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (9) TMI 418 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385650</link>
    <description>The petitioner in Crl. P. No. 5676 of 2012 was found not liable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as she was not directly involved in the issuance of the dishonored cheque. The court ruled the prosecution against her as illegal and quashed the proceedings. However, the trial against accused Nos. 1 and 2 was permitted to continue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Sep 2019 07:48:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=586780" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 418 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385650</link>
      <description>The petitioner in Crl. P. No. 5676 of 2012 was found not liable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as she was not directly involved in the issuance of the dishonored cheque. The court ruled the prosecution against her as illegal and quashed the proceedings. However, the trial against accused Nos. 1 and 2 was permitted to continue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385650</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>