Raj Reddy Kallem v. State of Andhra Pradesh
Supreme Court of India(2024) 3 SCC 141Bench: J. B.R. Gavai, J. Sandeep Mehta
The Supreme Court held that in Section 138 NI Act cases, courts should liberally exercise their power to exempt the accused from personal appearance under Section 317 CrPC (now Section 355 BNSS). Section 138 cases are commercial in nature and personal appearance of the accused is not required at every hearing — presence is necessary only when the court requires the accused to answer under Section 313 CrPC (examination of accused) or when the court specifically directs presence for good reason. The Court also endorsed the use of video conferencing (as directed in In Re: Expeditious Trial, 2021) as an alternative to physical presence. Courts should not insist on physical presence of accused at every date — this contributes to unnecessary pendency and hardship, especially for accused living in different states or cities from the court.