<?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>2017 (8) TMI 1693 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306031</link>
    <description>In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the accused may invoke Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure during cross-examination of the complainant to summon bank records and income tax returns when those documents are necessary to test the complainant&#039;s financial capacity and the source of funds. The court treated such material as relevant to an effective defence and held that the request was not barred by restrictions applicable at the stage of framing charge, because it was made during trial for confrontation. Denial of the opportunity was found inconsistent with the requirement of a fair trial under Article 21.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2023 09:31:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=700801" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1693 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306031</link>
      <description>In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the accused may invoke Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure during cross-examination of the complainant to summon bank records and income tax returns when those documents are necessary to test the complainant&#039;s financial capacity and the source of funds. The court treated such material as relevant to an effective defence and held that the request was not barred by restrictions applicable at the stage of framing charge, because it was made during trial for confrontation. Denial of the opportunity was found inconsistent with the requirement of a fair trial under Article 21.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306031</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>