Civil Procedure Code (CPC)

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

S Chhabra   17 November 2015

Ni act 138 queries

Dear Experts 

 

Please advice me regarding one fact related to NI Act 138

In case a person against whom cheque bounce case was filled and who accepted in writting to pay against his bounced cheques does not apears before court in coming dates ever after issuance of several NBWs. and found to be absconding as his mobile numbers being switched off.property locked all social media accounts deactivated.

what action will be taken by honorable court against him.

whether his property can be attached.

If it is found that before absconding he has sold all his property than what will happen.

whether his liabiity is personal or can be extended to his family if he has sold all his personal property in his name

Pls advice



 7 Replies

Nitish Banka (lawyer)     17 November 2015

Dear Chhabra,

He would bbe declared PO and his bank accounts and propertied can be attached.

Thanks & Regards,

Nitish Banka

9891549997

 

Advocate Bhartesh goyal (advocate)     17 November 2015

Court may proceed u/s 82 & 83 of cr.p.c.

Advocate Bhartesh goyal (advocate)     17 November 2015

Court may proceed u/s 82 & 83 of cr.p.c.

SAINATH DEVALLA (LEGAL CONSULTANT)     17 November 2015

Once he has disappeared  from his residential place,section 82/83 crpc applies.But if he has sold all his properties and closed his bank accounts and left the place with his family to an unknown destination,the tag proclaimed offender continues till he is arrested.

S Chhabra   19 November 2015

Originally posted by : SAINATH DEVALLA
Once he has disappeared  from his residential place,section 82/83 crpc applies.But if he has sold all his properties and closed his bank accounts and left the place with his family to an unknown destination,the tag proclaimed offender continues till he is arrested.

but how he will be traced after being decleared proclaimed offender.

Can we ourself intiate by advertising in newpapers or social media like face book etc.

can we use court order to take information from any organisation or concern where he was associated earlier

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     22 November 2015

 (i) The Hon. Supreme Court in  Criminal Appeal No.2287 of 2009 Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod vs. State of Maharashtra had ruled that All other Complaints (obviously including those where the accused / respondent has not been properly served) shall be returned to the Complainant for filing in the proper Court, in consonance with our exposition of the law. If such Complaints are filed/refiled within thirty days of their return, they shall be deemed to have been filed within the time prescribed by law, unless the initial or prior filing was itself time barred.

(ii) Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 promulgated on 15/06/2015 says
142A. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or any judgment, decree, order or directions of any court, all cases arising out of section 138 which were pending in any court, whether filed before it, or transferred to it, before the commencement of the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 shall be transferred to the court having jurisdiction under sub-section (2) of section 142 as if that sub-section had been in force at all material times.
When the SC judgement has been overturned by the ordinance, where is the question of returning the complaint to the complainant. Under what authority of law complaints have been returned by trial court? The courts are bound by the ordinance to TRANSFER the case to the jurisdiction court and not RETURN it to the complainant. What will happen if this decision to return the complaint to the complainant is challenged in high court? Are the courts still following Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod judgement or the Ordinance. The SC delivered the judgement on 1/8/2014. Then why was it not implemented for next 15 months and Courts continued to hear cases and why suddenly they woke up after promulgation of ordinance? Secondly, the ordinance was promulgated on 15/06/2015, then why no action was taken to return the documents and again why cases continued to be heard. These are very inconvenient question which nobody wants to answer.

Remembr that complainant has no authority to be in possession of court documents. Court documents cannot be given to him to keep in his custody. When the case had reached finality and judgement was to be delivered on the date when compaint was returned to the complaint or at most on the next hearing, giving case file in original means complainant can manipulate the original evidences submitted by accused and admitted as exhibits by the court, destroy documents since no proof will be availalble anywhere as certified copies of the complaint have not been retained by the transferor court.

Everybody seems to be groping in the dark.

sambath (junior)     23 November 2015

Please advice me regarding one fact related to NI Act 138

"A" is a reputed company they supply FMCGA goods. "B" is a dealer, he use "C"`s TIN &PIN number for his business"B" will pay amount through his SB account cheque to "A" company reguarly, this time B`s SB cheque was returned as "insufficent fund".

weather "A" shell take a legal action against "B"  is liable one or what kind if action shell take "A".

 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query