{"id":357810,"date":"2025-08-26T09:30:46","date_gmt":"2025-08-26T04:00:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=357810"},"modified":"2025-08-28T10:11:59","modified_gmt":"2025-08-28T04:41:59","slug":"bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/","title":{"rendered":"Recording reasons for non-examination of witness not mandatory under S. 202 CrPC: Bombay High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Bombay High Court:<\/span> In the present case, the Magistrate passed an order issuance of process under Section 202<\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’) as the petitioner’s cheque was dishonoured on the ground of ‘account closed’. The Single Judge Bench of Urmila Joshi-Phalke<\/span>, J., held that it was not mandatory to record the reasons for non-examination of witnesses on affidavit while exercising power under Section 202<\/a> of CrPC<\/a>. Hence, verification of the complaint was sufficient for compliance of Section 202<\/a> of CrPC<\/a> and not conducting inquiry would not vitiate the issuance of process. Therefore, no interference was required in the order passed by the Magistrate.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The petitioner was an incorporated company under the Companies Act, 2013<\/a>, while the respondent was the original complainant. The petitioner had purchased pulses, edible oil and other goods prior to year 2002 for an amount of Rs. 35,26,102 from a registered partnership firm based in Akola, which was payable as on 31-3-2002. It was agreed between the petitioner and the said firm that the petitioner shall pay interest on the outstanding amount at the rate of 12%. On 6-4-2021, the firm transferred the debt which was due from the petitioner to the respondent. This transfer of debt was effected by a registered instrument. As per this agreement, the respondent had agreed to pay an amount of Rs. 70,00,000 to the firm on or before 31-12-2021. Therefore, it was agreed that the respondent shall be entitled to receive, recover and retain the amount from petitioner.<\/p>\n

Thereafter, the complainant contacted the petitioner for the recovery of the amount. After negotiations, the petitioner finally issued a cheque of Rs. 75,00,000 to the respondent. When the cheque was presented by the respondent in the bank, the cheque got dishonoured stating the reason as “Account Closed”. Thus, the respondent served a demand notice within stipulated time, but the petitioner failed to make the payment within the statutory period.<\/p>\n

Aggrieved by the same, the respondent filed a complaint before the Magistrate, who passed an order for issuance of process. The petitioner filed a revision application against the order of the Magistrate which got dismissed. Hence, the petitioner approached the present Court for setting aside the order of Magistrate and for quashing of the criminal proceedings against it.<\/p>\n

The petitioner contended that it did not transact any business before 2002 with the respondent or with his predecessor, as alleged in the complaint and stated that the said complaint was filed with mala fide intention to harass and extract money from the petitioner. It was also contended that since the Magistrate did not give reasons for not conducting the inquiry under Section 202<\/a> of CrPC<\/a>, the order was liable to be quashed.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/h3>\n

Referring to the case Expeditious Trial of Cases Under Section 138<\/a> of NI Act, 1881<\/a>, In re<\/span>, (2021) 16 SCC 116<\/a>, wherein the Supreme Court clarified that Section 202(2)<\/a> of CrPC<\/a> was inapplicable to complaints under Section 138 in respect of examination of witnesses on oath, the Court observed that the ground of challenging the said order for not holding inquiry under Section 202<\/a> of CrPC<\/a> was unsustainable. Furthermore, it was opined by the Court that the examination or verification of complaint was sufficient compliance of Section 202<\/a> of CrPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court, after referring to the petitioner’s contention that the said order should be quashing on another ground that the debt could not be recovered as it was time barred, pointed out that Section 25(3)<\/a> of the Contract Act, 1872<\/a> (ICA) provided a crucial exception to the Limitation Act, 1963<\/a> which bars the recovery of debt after a particular time period. The Court stated that Section 25 of ICA validated a written and signed promise to pay a time barred debt. Thus, the issuance of cheque in the instant case fulfilled the requirement of the said section therefore, the said debt could not be called time-barred. Additionally, it was stated that the original transaction, even if time barred, served as valid past consideration for the new promise to pay represented by the cheque.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the Court held that since Section 25(3) of ICA was an exception to the Limitation Act, 1963, thus, debt was not time-barred and also held that it was not mandatory to record the reasons for not examining the witnesses on affidavit while exercising power under Section 202<\/a> of CrPC<\/a>, therefore, no interference was required in the order passed by the Magistrate.<\/p>\n

[Pancham International Ltd. v. Shevam, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2967<\/a>, decided on: 20-8-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

Advocate for the Petitioners-<\/span> A.S. Mardikar, Senior Counsel; Rohan Chandurkar, Benny Joseph, Advocates<\/p>\n

Advocate for the Respondents-<\/span> M.G. Sarda, Borwankar, Advocates<\/p>\n

Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"Code<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Verification of complaint without recording the reasons for non-examination of witnesses on affidavit, while exercising the power of issuing process, under Section 202 of CrPC would not amount to any procedural lapse.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":357828,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2569,36808,87916,72860,87917,36859,87915],"class_list":["post-357810","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-issue-of-process","tag-issue-of-process-section-138-ni-act","tag-justice-urmila-joshi-phalke","tag-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-of-witness","tag-section-202-crpc","tag-section-25-contract-act-1872"],"yoast_head":"\nBHC on recording reasons for non-examination of witness|SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Bombay High Court held that recording reasons for non-examination of witness is not mandatory under Section 202 of CrPC; verification of complaint sufficient compliance.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Recording reasons for non-examination of witness not mandatory under S. 202 CrPC: Bombay High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court held that recording reasons for non-examination of witness is not mandatory under Section 202 of CrPC; verification of complaint sufficient compliance.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-08-26T04:00:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-08-28T04:41:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/recording-reasons-for-non-examination-of-witness.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Recording reasons for non-examination of witness not mandatory under S. 202 CrPC: Bombay High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/\",\"name\":\"BHC on recording reasons for non-examination of witness|SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/recording-reasons-for-non-examination-of-witness.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-08-26T04:00:46+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-08-28T04:41:59+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Bombay High Court held that recording reasons for non-examination of witness is not mandatory under Section 202 of CrPC; verification of complaint sufficient compliance.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/recording-reasons-for-non-examination-of-witness.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/recording-reasons-for-non-examination-of-witness.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"recording reasons for non-examination of witness\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Recording reasons for non-examination of witness not mandatory under S. 202 CrPC: Bombay High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"BHC on recording reasons for non-examination of witness|SCC Times","description":"Bombay High Court held that recording reasons for non-examination of witness is not mandatory under Section 202 of CrPC; verification of complaint sufficient compliance.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Recording reasons for non-examination of witness not mandatory under S. 202 CrPC: Bombay High Court","og_description":"Bombay High Court held that recording reasons for non-examination of witness is not mandatory under Section 202 of CrPC; verification of complaint sufficient compliance.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-08-26T04:00:46+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-08-28T04:41:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/recording-reasons-for-non-examination-of-witness.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Recording reasons for non-examination of witness not mandatory under S. 202 CrPC: Bombay High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/","name":"BHC on recording reasons for non-examination of witness|SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/recording-reasons-for-non-examination-of-witness.webp","datePublished":"2025-08-26T04:00:46+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-28T04:41:59+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Bombay High Court held that recording reasons for non-examination of witness is not mandatory under Section 202 of CrPC; verification of complaint sufficient compliance.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/recording-reasons-for-non-examination-of-witness.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/recording-reasons-for-non-examination-of-witness.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"recording reasons for non-examination of witness"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/26\/bom-hc-on-recording-reasons-for-non-examination-witness\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Recording reasons for non-examination of witness not mandatory under S. 202 CrPC: Bombay High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/recording-reasons-for-non-examination-of-witness.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":313213,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/06\/cal-hc-sets-aside-magistrates-orders-emphasises-mandatory-compliance-with-section-202-of-crpc-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":357810,"position":0},"title":"Securities Misappropriation | Calcutta High Court sets aside Magistrate\u2019s orders on non-compliance of mandatory provision of Section 202 CrPC","author":"Ritu","date":"February 6, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe compliance of provision under Section 202 of the CrPC, 1973, is compulsory and unavoidable for a Magistrate before issuance of summons in case of alleged offender who resides outside his territorial jurisdiction.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":250848,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/07\/06\/converting-a-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-from-summary-trial-to-summons-trial-in-exercise-of-power-under-s-143-ni-act-sufficient-and-cogent-reasons-to-be-recorded-chh-hc-issues-practice-direction\/","url_meta":{"origin":357810,"position":1},"title":"Converting a complaint under S. 138 NI Act from summary trial to summons trial in exercise of power under S. 143 NI Act; Sufficient and cogent reasons to be recorded | Chh HC issues Practice Directions","author":"Editor","date":"July 6, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Chhattisgarh High Court relied on Supreme Court judgment In re: Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act 1881, dated 16-04-2021, following directions are issued in compliance of the order. These are: The Magistrates having jurisdiction to try offences under the Negotiable Instruments At, 1881 shall record\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Hot Off The Press"","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":258444,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/14\/section-138-ni-act-10\/","url_meta":{"origin":357810,"position":2},"title":"For summoning accused under S. 138 NI Act, recording of statements under Ss. 200 and 202 is required? All HC decides","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 14, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court: Sameer Jain, J., decided that whether for summoning an accused under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, recording of statements under Section 200 and 202 of CrPC is required or not. Instant application was filed under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings of complaint case\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":218995,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/02\/bom-hc-magistrate-can-issue-process-against-accused-residing-beyond-his-area-of-jurisdiction-only-after-inquiry-as-contemplated-under-s-202-crpc\/","url_meta":{"origin":357810,"position":3},"title":"Bom HC | Magistrate can issue process against accused residing beyond his area of jurisdiction only after inquiry as contemplated under S. 202 CrPC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 2, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0S.S Shinde, J. allowed a criminal application to the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate (First Class) issuing process against the applicant for the offences punishable under Section 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Penal Code.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":341355,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/14\/bomhc-quashes-case-against-nestle-for-allegedly-selling-sub-standard-maggie-noodles\/","url_meta":{"origin":357810,"position":4},"title":"Bombay HC quashes case against Nestle India Ltd. for allegedly selling \u2018sub-standard\u2019 Maggie noodles","author":"Simranjeet","date":"February 14, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"If the food\/sample is tested in a laboratory which does not fall within the definition of Section 3(p) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and is not recognized by the Food Authority, the analysis made in such laboratory cannot be relied upon.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291430,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/06\/sc-directs-re-examination-of-rape-complaint-against-bjp-leader-kailash-vijayvargiya\/","url_meta":{"origin":357810,"position":5},"title":"Explained | Why Supreme Court directed re-examination of rape complaint against BJP leader Kailash Vijayvargiya","author":"Ridhi","date":"May 6, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court went into the depths of Chapter 12 of Code of Criminal Procedure regarding a complaint case before Magistrate and the case laws around them.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"bjp leader kailash vijayvargiya","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bjp-leader-kailash-vijayvargiya.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bjp-leader-kailash-vijayvargiya.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bjp-leader-kailash-vijayvargiya.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bjp-leader-kailash-vijayvargiya.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/357810","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=357810"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/357810\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/357828"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=357810"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=357810"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=357810"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}