Balancing the rights of the accused with the complainant's right to access justice

requires courts to ensure that technical terminations do not result in unjust windfalls for defaulting drawer-accused in cheque bounce litigations. While the procedural safeguards granted to an accused under criminal law are vital to prevent harassment, these protections cannot be extended to confer an undeserved escape from statutory liability on grounds of sheer procedural happenstance. Restoring a complaint case dismissed for default does not prejudice the accused on the merits of their defense, as they retain complete liberty to cross-examine witnesses, present evidence, and establish their innocence during trial. Therefore, balancing the competing interests of both sides requires restoring the complaint so that justice may be rendered after a full evidentiary trial rather than aborted prematurely. (Yatendra Singh Vs State of U.P. & Another | 2026 INSC 109)