Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2019 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1130 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - cross-examination of witnesses - Complainant filed an application to recall the witness (CW1) and allow the complainant to produce the relevant documents through its witness - HELD THAT:- This Court has clearly observed that the documents of acknowledgement or delivery now cannot be proved from the complainant who is already cross examined, and on this point the person from M/s. BMG Chemicals is the correct witness and is required to be examined in order to find out the truth. In my view, it is in the context of the aforesaid observations, this Court though dismissed the Writ Petitions, has granted liberty to the Complainant to file appropriate applications. The cross examination of the witness of the complainant is over and the matter is closed for arguments. Now the complainant wants to bring on record certain documents which, according to the complainant, would go to the root of the matter. The accused had placed orders for goods with the complainant and the cheques issued as against the said orders when represented to the bankers were returned with remark “Payment Stopped”. The present complaints are under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant wants to bring on record certain documents, which according to the complainant, are relevant to the transaction between the complainant and the accused and go to the root of the matter - The accused would get an opportunity to cross examine the witnesses at length and no prejudice would be caused to the accused if the documents relating to the transaction are allowed to be produced on record, which would help the trial Court to decide the matter correctly. Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code - HELD THAT:- This Court does not prevent the Court to summon or even recall the witness. In this context a useful reference could be made to the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of Mohan Lal Shamji Soni V/s. Union of India & ors. [ 1991 (2) TMI 142 - SUPREME COURT ] wherein the Apex Court had considered the scope of Section 540 of the Criminal Procedure Code which is similar to Section 311 of the Code. The Apex Court observed that it is a cardinal rule in the law of evidence that the best available evidence should be brought before the Court to prove a fact or the points in issue. Petition dismissed.
|