Meenakshi v. State of Haryana -CrPC- Presence Of Accused For Hearing- Suspension Of Sentence
Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 374, 397, 389 - directing the accused to be present before the Appellate Court or the Revisional Court would not be warranted particularly after an order for suspension of sentence has been passed and bail has been granted- to call upon the accused to be present on every date of hearing before the Revisional Court or the Appellate Court would be burdensome to such accused and same is not warranted at all and it would serve no purpose. In the event of appeal or revision being dismissed the consequences would automatically follow and the jurisdictional magistrate would be fully empowered to secure the presence of such accused in accordance with the provisions of the Act. (Para 6-7)
Case Info
Case Details
- Case name: Meenakshi v. State of Haryana & Another.
- Coram: Justice Aravind Kumar; Justice Prasanna B. Varale.
- Judgment/order date: 07 January 2026 (signed at New Delhi).
- Case type and numbers: Criminal Appeal (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 19050 of 2025); underlying appeal CRA No. 956/2017; High Court CRM-M-56737/2025; SC Record Item No.31, Court No.15, Section II-B.
Neutral Citation
A neutral citation is not shown in the document. The Supreme Court’s order and the Record of Proceedings do not display any neutral citation string; only case numbers and dates are given.
Caselaws and Citations
The order does not cite any precedents or external case law. It is an order on facts and practice, without referencing reported decisions.
Statutes/Laws Referred
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: Section 138 (dishonour of cheque leading to conviction).
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): Schedule II, Form No.45 (Bond and Bail-Bond for attendance) referenced as the basis for local practice.
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS): Section 528 (invoked alongside CrPC Section 482 in the High Court petition).