https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415201 Post-amendment territorial jurisdiction under the Negotiable Instruments Act governs cheque dishonour complaints, so an objection based on the earlier Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod position will not, by itself, justify quashing. A variation in the complainant's name across the receipt, cheque and complaint is insufficient where the record identifies the same person and the cheque was issued in that person's favour. Inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC cannot be used to conduct a merits-based review when the complaint discloses the ingredients of Section 138 and cognizance has already been taken. The proceedings were therefore permitted to continue at the threshold. en-us Mon, 08 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Nov 2021 08:30:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415201 Post-amendment territorial jurisdiction under the Negotiable Instruments Act governs cheque dishonour complaints, so an objection based on the earlier Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod position will not, by itself, justify quashing. A variation in the complainant's name across the receipt, cheque and complaint is insufficient where the record identifies the same person and the cheque was issued in that person's favour. Inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC cannot be used to conduct a merits-based review when the complaint discloses the ingredients of Section 138 and cognizance has already been taken. The proceedings were therefore permitted to continue at the threshold. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 08 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415201