<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (9) TMI 1070 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304143</link>
    <description>A complainant in a Section 138 NI Act prosecution may be examined on commission at her residence when bona fide medical grounds make personal attendance unreasonable and examination is necessary for justice under Section 284 CrPC. The witness&#039;s filing of a proof affidavit also supported taking evidence without insisting on court attendance. However, the commission cannot be entrusted to an Advocate Commissioner, because Sections 285 and 286 CrPC require the evidence to be recorded through the prescribed judicial authority, namely a Metropolitan or Judicial Magistrate. The Magistrate was therefore directed to record the complainant&#039;s evidence at her residence, and the revisional order was reversed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2022 18:52:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=690274" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 1070 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304143</link>
      <description>A complainant in a Section 138 NI Act prosecution may be examined on commission at her residence when bona fide medical grounds make personal attendance unreasonable and examination is necessary for justice under Section 284 CrPC. The witness&#039;s filing of a proof affidavit also supported taking evidence without insisting on court attendance. However, the commission cannot be entrusted to an Advocate Commissioner, because Sections 285 and 286 CrPC require the evidence to be recorded through the prescribed judicial authority, namely a Metropolitan or Judicial Magistrate. The Magistrate was therefore directed to record the complainant&#039;s evidence at her residence, and the revisional order was reversed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304143</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>