9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Restoration of a dismissed petition. 2. Challenge to an order under Section 482 Cr.PC. 3. Interpretation of the SARFAESI Act and its applicability to criminal proceedings. 4. Substitution of a complainant under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Restoration of Dismissed Petition: The judgment addresses an application for the restoration of a petition that was dismissed in default. The court allowed the application and restored the petition to its original number, disposing of the matter. Challenge to Order under Section 482 Cr.PC: The petition under Section 482 Cr.PC contested an order dismissing a revision petition against a previous order. The case involved a complaint by SIDBI against the petitioners for dishonoring cheques and non-payment. The ISARC company, through an assignment deed, acquired SIDBI's rights and interests in the case. The petitioners challenged the substitution of ISARC as the complainant, but the court found no merit in the arguments and dismissed the petition. Interpretation of SARFAESI Act and Criminal Proceedings: The judgment delves into the interpretation of the SARFAESI Act concerning the acquisition of financial assets. It clarifies that under the Act, the assignee company steps into the shoes of the assignor and acquires all rights, including in criminal proceedings. The court rejected the argument that the Act only applies to civil law remedies, emphasizing that the Act protects the assignee's rights in all types of proceedings, including criminal cases. Substitution of Complainant under Negotiable Instruments Act: The judgment also addresses the substitution of the complainant under the Negotiable Instruments Act. It explains that ISARC, as the assignee of SIDBI's rights, had the authority to continue the complaint against the petitioners. The court held that ISARC, as the holder in due course, had acquired all the rights and claims related to the financial assets, including the cheques issued by the petitioners. The petition challenging ISARC's substitution was dismissed for lack of merit. In conclusion, the judgment provides a detailed analysis of the issues related to the restoration of a petition, challenges under Section 482 Cr.PC, the interpretation of the SARFAESI Act in criminal proceedings, and the substitution of a complainant under the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court's decision upheld the rights of the assignee company and dismissed the petitioners' arguments, emphasizing the legal validity of the assignment and the assignee's standing in the case.
|
