Skip to content


V.K. JaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCompany;Commercial
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Judge
Reported in[2000]100CompCas827(SC); (2000)126PLR366; (2000)1SCC709
ActsNegotiable Instruments Act - Sections 138; Constitution of India - Article 32
AppellantV.K. Jain
RespondentUnion of India (Uoi) and ors.
Excerpt:
.....rigorous imprisonment for life.section 302: sentencing death penalty or life imprisonment - prosecution case based exclusively on the basis of evidence of approver-accused contradicting the prosecution held, manner of application of prudence doctrine in such a case at the stage of sentencing. at sentencing stage, court although cannot evaluate the evidence and has to depend on the findings arrived t for recording judgment of conviction, it has to keep in view the evidence brought on record on behalf of the accused for imposition of a lesser punishment.section 302: death sentence - held, equal protection clause ingrained under article 14 applies to the judicial process at the sentencing stage. articles 14 and 21 of constitution would require a fair distribution of punishment..........of the company which issued the cheques. it is a defence which he can adopt in the prosecutions. but merely raising such a contention now is no ground for quashing the prosecutions.2. all the same, considering the plight of the petitioner in defending prosecution proceedings instituted at various places in india on the strength of the cheques issued by the company of which he was the director, we permit the petitioner to move the court concerned (before which the prosecution is pending in any of the cases) for exempting him from personal appearance. this can be done only after making the first appearance in the court concerned. if any such application is filed by the petitioner, we direct the court concerned to exempt him from personal appearance on the following conditions:1. a counsel.....
Judgment:

1. This writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution for quashing various prosecution proceedings launched against this petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act merely on the ground that petitioner is unable to go to all the different Courts where the cases are pending. He contends that he was not participating in the affairs of the Company which issued the cheques. It is a defence which he can adopt in the prosecutions. But merely raising such a contention now is no ground for quashing the prosecutions.

2. All the same, considering the plight of the petitioner in defending prosecution proceedings instituted at various places in India on the strength of the cheques issued by the Company of which he was the Director, we permit the petitioner to move the Court concerned (before which the prosecution is pending in any of the cases) for exempting him from personal appearance. This can be done only after making the first appearance in the Court concerned. If any such application is filed by the petitioner, we direct the Court concerned to exempt him from personal appearance on the following conditions:

1. A counsel on his behalf would be present in the particular Court on days when his case is taken up;

2. He will not dispute his identity as the accused in the case.

3. He will be present in Court when such presence is imperatively needed.

With the aforesaid reliefs granted to the petitioner we dispose of the writ petition.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //