2022 (6) TMI 297

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ishable under Section 138 N.I. Act by the 2nd respondent. CMP No. 1422/2021 was an application filed under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') seeking to recall and re-examine the complainant for the purpose of marking certain additional documents produced after concluding examination of the complainant as PW1. The trial court has dismissed the application for reasons extracted hereunder: "It is evident from the documents furnished by the complainant that it goes back to the period from 20th April 2011 to 20th August 2011. It is further evident from the deposition of PW1 in the cross examination that there were suggestion by the counsel for the accused as to non production of bills. Hen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... reasons the petition stands dismissed. No cost." 3. The contention of Sri. Akshay R., the learned counsel for the petitioner was that the court below went wrong in dismissing the application. According to him, the complainant was examined as PW1 on 13.02.2021 and when the case was posted for further evidence to 14.12.2021, additional documents had been produced by the complainant. Certain documents were further produced on 16.12.2021. Reception of those documents in evidence was opposed by the accused. Therefore, CMP No. 1422/2021 was filed by the complainant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. on 22.12.2021 seeking to recall PW1. By it's order dated 10.02.2022, the trial court dismissed CMP No. 1422/2021, copy of which is produced alongwith ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Moreover, the bills proposed to be marked in evidence are issued by the concern, Cherupushpam Traders, Padiyottuchal. But there is absolutely nothing in the pleadings of the complainant that he was the Proprietor of Cherupushpam Traders. Therefore, without a whisper being made about the name of the concern run by the complainant and about the transaction which caused the liability necessitated the issuance of the cheque was related to that concern, the production and marking of the additional documents in evidence through PW1 will not serve the purpose intended by the complainant. Moreover, additional documents produced and proposed for marking are only photocopies and the reason for non production of originals of those having not been stat....