https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285490 In an appeal arising from conviction under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the court examined whether amounts already recovered in SARFAESI proceedings could be adjusted against the deposit directed under Section 148, and held that such adjustment is permissible where the recoveries relate to the same underlying liability, so as to avoid double recovery. It also clarified that non-deposit of the Section 148 amount does not automatically or consequentially cancel bail, because the Act contains no express provision creating that consequence and default only permits recovery through the statutory mechanism. The challenge was therefore allowed and the impugned directions were set aside. en-us Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jan 2020 20:32:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285490 In an appeal arising from conviction under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the court examined whether amounts already recovered in SARFAESI proceedings could be adjusted against the deposit directed under Section 148, and held that such adjustment is permissible where the recoveries relate to the same underlying liability, so as to avoid double recovery. It also clarified that non-deposit of the Section 148 amount does not automatically or consequentially cancel bail, because the Act contains no express provision creating that consequence and default only permits recovery through the statutory mechanism. The challenge was therefore allowed and the impugned directions were set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285490