https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401708 In proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the trial court's direction requiring the accused to deposit 20% of the cheque amount under Section 143-A was treated as a proper exercise of discretion because cognizance had been taken, the plea stage had been reached, and the presumption under Section 139 had not yet been rebutted. The absence of a separate application by the complainant did not prevent the court from invoking Section 143-A on its own motion in an appropriate case. A brief or cryptic order did not, by itself, justify interference under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, particularly where no failure of justice or disclosed defence was shown. en-us Tue, 01 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Dec 2020 10:35:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401708 In proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the trial court's direction requiring the accused to deposit 20% of the cheque amount under Section 143-A was treated as a proper exercise of discretion because cognizance had been taken, the plea stage had been reached, and the presumption under Section 139 had not yet been rebutted. The absence of a separate application by the complainant did not prevent the court from invoking Section 143-A on its own motion in an appropriate case. A brief or cryptic order did not, by itself, justify interference under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, particularly where no failure of justice or disclosed defence was shown. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 01 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401708