MAHENDRA KISHORE KHATAU Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case the petitioner had made an application for exemption from appearing in the Court. The applicant is facing trial under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The applicant is the chairman and Managing Director of Khatau Group of companies consisting of 5 companies and he is required to attend the day to day business at his office. Thus the application was made for exemption and assurance was given to the learned Magistrate that the learned advocate for the accused will be present in the Court as and when directed by the Court. Inspite of this, the application was rejected.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the applicant has cited the case of Inandu Lal Chandraker vs. Puranmal and another reported in 1989 Cr.L.J. 296 and a judgment in the case of Helen Rubber Industries Kottayam and others vs. State of Kerala and others. The Kerala High Court observed as follows:

(3.) IN view of the above, the petition is made absolute in terms of player clause (c) with the modification that the petitioner will ensure that he is represented through the counsel on each and every hearing of the case and that he will be present in the Court as and when required by the Court.