https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310409 The court addressed the petitioners' challenge to the legality of proceedings under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioners argued the complaint was not maintainable due to unproven essential elements. The court, acknowledging the need for evidence, directed that if the petitioners apply under Sec. 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, they may be exempted from personal attendance, subject to terms set by the trial court. The court warned against using this exemption to delay proceedings, allowing for necessary orders if such attempts occur. en-us Fri, 29 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:15:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310409 The court addressed the petitioners' challenge to the legality of proceedings under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioners argued the complaint was not maintainable due to unproven essential elements. The court, acknowledging the need for evidence, directed that if the petitioners apply under Sec. 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, they may be exempted from personal attendance, subject to terms set by the trial court. The court warned against using this exemption to delay proceedings, allowing for necessary orders if such attempts occur. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 29 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310409