https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299397 A Karnataka HC note explains that a proceeding before the Sessions Judge was treated as an appeal, not a second revision, so the statutory bar on a second revision did not apply. It also states that in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, parallel pending consumer forum proceedings over the cheque amount did not justify a reduced sentence. The later consumer forum order could not be used to deny the complainant the criminal remedy, and any risk of duplicated relief could be dealt with by the consumer forum. The conviction remained undisturbed and the sentence was enhanced. en-us Mon, 23 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Dec 2021 18:51:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299397 A Karnataka HC note explains that a proceeding before the Sessions Judge was treated as an appeal, not a second revision, so the statutory bar on a second revision did not apply. It also states that in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, parallel pending consumer forum proceedings over the cheque amount did not justify a reduced sentence. The later consumer forum order could not be used to deny the complainant the criminal remedy, and any risk of duplicated relief could be dealt with by the consumer forum. The conviction remained undisturbed and the sentence was enhanced. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 23 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299397