Additional evidence in cheque dishonour appeals is permissible when needed for a just decision and no prejudice is caused.

In a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act complaint, the appellate court's power to admit additional evidence under Sections 391 and 311 CrPC is broad but controlled by fairness: it may be exercised when the evidence is necessary for a just decision, does not change the nature of the defence, is not merely to fill a lacuna, and causes no prejudice to the other side. Bank statements were treated as documentary evidence relevant to the financial transactions, source and repayment of funds, and the complainant would still have an opportunity to cross-examine the witness. The appellate order permitting additional evidence was therefore upheld and found lawful.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate court was justified in allowing the accused's application for additional evidence under Section 391 read with Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Analysis: The appellate court has wide power to permit additional evidence if it is necessary for a just decision and if it does not cause prejudice, amount to a retrial, change the nature of the defence, or merely fill a lacuna. The proposed bank statements were documentary in nature and were sought to explain the financial transactions between the parties, including the source and repayment of funds. The trial court's observations themselves showed that the question of repayment and the exact linkage of the transactions had not been fully clarified. The accused had not been shown to be introducing a new defence, and the complainant would have an opportunity to cross-examine the witness brought for additional evidence.

Conclusion: The order allowing additional evidence was upheld and no illegality was found in the exercise of appellate power.

Final Conclusion: The revision petition failed, and the allowance of additional evidence at the appellate stage remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Additional evidence may be permitted at the appellate stage when it is essential for a just decision, does not change the nature of the case, and is not sought merely to fill a lacuna, provided no prejudice is caused to the other side.

---