https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95383 The dominant issue was whether inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita could be invoked to quash a conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the NI Act after the criminal revision had been finally decided. The Court held that final adjudication of a criminal revision exhausts the Court's power to reopen the conviction through inherent jurisdiction; earlier single-judge authority suggesting otherwise was not accepted as permitting such post-revisional interference, and a contrary view in a later case was treated as fact-specific and not laying down a binding principle. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable, reserving liberty to pursue permissible remedies. - HC en-us Fri, 26 Dec 2025 07:18:36 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 07:18:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95383 The dominant issue was whether inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita could be invoked to quash a conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the NI Act after the criminal revision had been finally decided. The Court held that final adjudication of a criminal revision exhausts the Court's power to reopen the conviction through inherent jurisdiction; earlier single-judge authority suggesting otherwise was not accepted as permitting such post-revisional interference, and a contrary view in a later case was treated as fact-specific and not laying down a binding principle. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable, reserving liberty to pursue permissible remedies. - HC Highlights Indian Laws Fri, 26 Dec 2025 07:18:36 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95383