X hits on this document

148 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

11 / 40

cases) in Ahmedabad, followed by Surat, Vadodara and Rajkot.6 73,000 cases were filed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (cheque bouncing) on a single day by a private telecom company before a Bangalore court, informed the Chief Justice of India, K. G. Balakrishnan, urging the Government to appoint more judges to deal with 1.8 crore pending cases in the country.7 The number of complaints which are pending in Bombay Courts seriously cast shadow on the credibility of our trade, commerce and business. Immediate steps have to be taken by all concerned to ensure restoration of the credibility of trade, commerce and business.8

1.6

Very recently, while allowing the appeal of

bouncing case, the Supreme Court fundamental right of an accused.9

has

ruled

an accused in a cheque that speedy trial is a

1.7

The purpose of this Report is to recommend setting up of Fast Track

Courts at Magisterial level with high-tech facilities. Huge backlog of cheque bouncing or dishonoured cheque cases need to be speedily disposed of through this measure, lest the litigants lose faith in the judicial system. Unless there is sufficient number of courts for resolving cheque bouncing disputes speedily and efficiently, the problem will continue to be alarming. Commercial circles in India and abroad must be assured a fast and efficient

judicial system in India.

6

7

8

9

http://www.indianexpress.com, visited 26.09.2008. http://www.deccanherald.com and http://www.aol.in, visited 29.09.2008. KSL & Industries Ltd. v. Mannalal Khandelwal 2005 Cri.L.J. 1201 (Bom.), 1204. S. Rama Krishna v. S. Rami Reddy AIR 2008 SC 2066.

11

Document info
Document views148
Page views148
Page last viewedFri Dec 09 21:38:02 UTC 2016
Pages40
Paragraphs769
Words8885

Comments