Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2019 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 2105 - HC - Indian LawsSeeking leave to cross examine the first respondent-complainant - Dishonour of Cheque - petitioner failed to comply with the notice and has even failed to issue any reply to the said notice - HELD THAT:- As has been noticed by the learned Magistrate, in normal circumstances, a party is not required to seek leave to cross examine the witness of an adversary. However, the present matter is governed by the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of INDIAN BANK ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [2014 (5) TMI 750 - SUPREME COURT] which has been reiterated in a recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Meters and Instruments Private Limited & anr. vs. Kanchan Mehta, [2017 (10) TMI 218 - SUPREME COURT]. It can thus be seen that the trial of the offence under Section 138 of the Act is a class apart and the Magistrate is required to conduct the trial normally in a summary way and in accordance with the procedure laid down for summary trials and in the light of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Indian Bank Association and Meters and Instruments Private Limited. Coming to the present case, the impugned order cannot be faulted going by the casual nature in which the application, exhibit 12 was filed and the relief was sought. Perhaps, faced with this difficulty, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has sought liberty to file a fresh application setting out the defence and for a direction to the learned Magistrate to decide it afresh. The first point of time when the accused has an opportunity to set out his defence is when he sends a reply to the statutory notice of the complainant. The second such opportunity to set out the grounds is in the application seeking leave to cross examine the complainant. In a given case, the accused can also disclose such grounds during the course of the hearing of the application and in answer to the questions which may be posed by the learned Magistrate as is permissible - liberty granted to the petitioner to file a fresh application as the possibility of inventing a defence in the given circumstances, cannot be ruled out in this case. Petition dismissed.
|