Petitioners Fail to Compel GST Official's Testimony in Negotiable Instruments Act Case Under Section 138

HC dismissed petitioners' appeal challenging the lower court's order refusing to summon a GST Department official during the complainant's evidence stage in a Section 138 NI Act case. The court held that petitioners could address documentary evidence and outstanding amounts during their defense stage, finding no procedural irregularity in the original order.

---

---

Issues:
1. Setting aside an order dismissing an application to summon an official from the GST Department and produce GST 3B return in a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Analysis:
The petitioners sought to set aside an order passed by the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhuri, dismissing their application to summon an official from the GST Department and produce the GST 3B return in a criminal complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complaint alleged dishonor of cheques issued by the petitioners in favor of the respondent-complainant. The petitioners moved the application during the stage of producing evidence by the respondent-complainant, aiming to confront the complainant with the GST 3B return. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application, stating that the petitioners could produce the record from the GST Department during their defense evidence stage, not during the respondent's evidence stage.

The petitioners contended that the impugned order lacked proper consideration and that summoning the GST Department official and producing the GST 3B return was crucial for a just decision. However, after hearing the petitioners' counsel and examining the record, the court opined that the petition did not merit allowance. The court emphasized that while the petitioners had the right to cross-examine the complainant and her witnesses and confront them with documents, this did not entitle them to summon a witness during the respondent's evidence stage. The court highlighted that the petitioners failed to produce the GST 3B return despite being asked to do so, and the argument regarding outstanding amounts could be addressed during the defense evidence stage.

The court upheld the trial Magistrate's decision, noting that the dismissal was based on a well-reasoned order considering all relevant facts and circumstances. The court found no merit in the petition and consequently dismissed it.

---