https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302603 A company-complainant in criminal proceedings may substitute its authorised representative; the complainant remains the same juristic person, and continuity of the original individual representative is not mandatory. Affidavit evidence filed as examination-in-chief under Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must still be tested by cross-examination, and an untested affidavit does not become complete legal evidence. Where the original deponent does not appear despite opportunity and the substituted representative gives no substantive evidence on the ingredients of Section 138, the complaint cannot be sustained and remand for fresh evidence is not warranted. en-us Sat, 25 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Jun 2022 10:27:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302603 A company-complainant in criminal proceedings may substitute its authorised representative; the complainant remains the same juristic person, and continuity of the original individual representative is not mandatory. Affidavit evidence filed as examination-in-chief under Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must still be tested by cross-examination, and an untested affidavit does not become complete legal evidence. Where the original deponent does not appear despite opportunity and the substituted representative gives no substantive evidence on the ingredients of Section 138, the complaint cannot be sustained and remand for fresh evidence is not warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sat, 25 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302603