Complainant Archives

Delhi Court acquits accused under Section 138 NI Act on failure to establish debt adjustment

The complainant woefully failed to account for the amount of Rs 6,11,071/- which was due on him towards the accused. Therefore, it cannot be said that the amount represented on the cheque in question was a legally recoverable debt.

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi HC refuses to mandate criminal courts to issue notice to complainant/victim at pre-trial stage, says ‘such direction likely to work against objective of expeditious trials’

“The petitioner’s suggestion that it should be made mandatory for the Criminal Court to issue a notice to the complainant/victim at every stage of the pre-trial and trial in criminal proceedings, if accepted would act as ‘a treatment worse than the disease’.”

Case Briefs High Courts

‘Lawyers are essential and powerful pillars of judicial process’; Delhi High Court rejects plea of a woman accused of assaulting a lawyer

The lawyers are bound by their commitment to the duties cast on them by Part VI (Rules Governing Advocates), Chapter II (Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette) of Bar Council of India Rules which define their duties towards the Court, Client, Opponent and Colleagues.

Case Briefs High Courts

POCSO| Getting date of birth changed in Aadhaar to establish that minor victim was a consenting adult is a serious offence; Delhi High Court denies bail to a married man

Delhi High Court denied bail to a married person as he wanted to take advantage of the complainant by getting the complainant’s Date of Birth on the Aadhar Card changed so that when the applicant established physical relationship with the complainant, she would not have been a minor.

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi High Court | Statement made under Sec 164 CrPC disclosing commission of rape is sufficient to frame charges under Sec 376 IPC

Delhi High Court: In a case where revision petition was filed against the order passed by the Trial Court by

Case Briefs High Courts

Karnataka HC | Simply in order to dispose of cases, Courts should not dismiss complaints where the presence/attendance of the complainant is not an essential requirement

Karnataka High Court: While deciding the instant appeal for restoration assailing the order passed by the Trial Court wherein the

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Section 138 NI Act| Prima-facie indication as to complaint by a company through an authorised employee having knowledge of the case enough for Magistrate to take cognizance

Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of NV Ramana, CJ and AS Bopanna* and Hima Kohli, JJ has held that when the complainant/payee

Case Briefs High Courts

AP HC | If the de facto complainant feels insulted as he was beaten in front of public and if he takes a hasty decision to commit suicide; will the accused be held responsible in the eyes of law?

Andhra Pradesh High Court: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy J. partly allowed the petition by quashing FIR for the offence punishable under Section 306

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Explained| Can more than one consumer institute a complaint under Consumer Protection Act 2019? Why is the definition of “complainant” misleading?

Supreme Court: In a case where it was alleged that more than one consumer cannot institute a complaint unless they come within

Case Briefs High Courts

Madras HC | Presumption under S. 139 NI Act not available in case of principal-agent relationship between accused and complainant

Madras High Court: G. Jayachandran, J., dismissed an appeal directed against the judgment of the first Appellate Court whereby it had reversed the

Case Briefs High Courts

Madras HC | Unlawful for holder of cheque to fill date and amount in blank cheque beyond knowledge of accused; execution of cheque explained

Madras High Court: The Bench of M.V. Muralidharan, J. upheld the order of respondent’s acquittal for an offence punishable under Section 138 of

Case Briefs High Courts

Securing ends of justice ultimate guiding factor; continuation of criminal proceedings where complainant herself approached the Court held to be exercise in futility: Delhi HC

Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. allowed a petition for quashing of an FIR registered under Section