https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187750 The court upheld the trial court's decision to reject the application to call the complainant for recording examination-in-chief in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It clarified that introducing facts in the affidavit not in the complaint would not prejudice the accused as the content could be challenged during cross-examination. The court emphasized the complainant's freedom to provide evidence by affidavit under Section 145, with the option for cross-examination if requested by the accused. The judgment affirmed the trial court's order as just and proper, emphasizing the importance of addressing evidence admissibility objections during the trial for a fair process. en-us Tue, 11 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Nov 2016 16:13:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187750 The court upheld the trial court's decision to reject the application to call the complainant for recording examination-in-chief in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It clarified that introducing facts in the affidavit not in the complaint would not prejudice the accused as the content could be challenged during cross-examination. The court emphasized the complainant's freedom to provide evidence by affidavit under Section 145, with the option for cross-examination if requested by the accused. The judgment affirmed the trial court's order as just and proper, emphasizing the importance of addressing evidence admissibility objections during the trial for a fair process. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 11 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187750