Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2014 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (6) TMI 1036 - MADRAS HIGH COURTDishonor of Cheque - case of accused is that the cheque in question was not issued to the complainant but to one Sankar - rejection of evidence - accused also submitted that the complainant has lodged a prosecution on the ground that the accused had borrowed ₹ 2,32,097/- which on the face of it appears improbable because no one will borrow any amount in fractions - HELD THAT:- There seems to be some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the accused with regard to the amount of ₹ 2,32,097/- being the alleged amount that was borrowed from the complainant without any supporting documents - In the background of this aspect the other contentions of the accused should also be viewed and that he should not be denied a fair opportunity to establish his case in order to discharge the burden under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In this regard, the accused has first played the recorded conversation in the open Court and has asked the complainant to identify his voice. Had the complainant accepted that fact, then the accused would have been able to mark the compact disc containing the conversation as material object in favour of his defence. In this case, the complainant has not completely denied his voice but has merely stated that he is not able to recognise the voice. It may be borne in mind that the complainant admittedly is a retired Superintendent of Police and not a lay man. Admissibility of evidence - HELD THAT:- The argument of the learned counsel for the complainant that illegally collected evidence should not be admitted in the Court of law deserves to be stated only to be rejected because if any piece of evidence is admissible and relevant it cannot be shut out on the ground that it has been illegally collected. In the event of the accused marking the compact disc in a manner known to law like for example waiving his privilege under Section 315 Cr. P.C. and getting into the witness box, then he should be given liberty to file a fresh application requesting the Court to collect the sample voices of both of them (complainant and accused) and send the same for comparison. This will be in tune with his right of fair trial guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The trial Court is directed to expeditiously complete the proceedings in this case as it relates to the year of 2011. Petition disposed off.
|