https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765025 In cheque dishonour prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, persistent and unjustified absence of the accused may justify the trial court in continuing the evidence and proceeding with the trial, even though Section 273 of the Criminal Procedure Code generally contemplates evidence in the presence of the accused or pleader. The same approach may support dispensing with examination under Section 313 CrPC where the accused deliberately avoids proceedings, because that provision is meant to serve a meaningful opportunity of explanation and is not to be applied mechanically in a special, summary and quasi-criminal proceeding. The stated approach reflects the special statutory scheme and the need for expeditious disposal. en-us Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Jan 2025 08:44:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765025 In cheque dishonour prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, persistent and unjustified absence of the accused may justify the trial court in continuing the evidence and proceeding with the trial, even though Section 273 of the Criminal Procedure Code generally contemplates evidence in the presence of the accused or pleader. The same approach may support dispensing with examination under Section 313 CrPC where the accused deliberately avoids proceedings, because that provision is meant to serve a meaningful opportunity of explanation and is not to be applied mechanically in a special, summary and quasi-criminal proceeding. The stated approach reflects the special statutory scheme and the need for expeditious disposal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765025