9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 774X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Adv. Mr. Piyush Kaushik, Adv. For the Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Bakshi, Adv. Mr. M. C. Dhingra, AOR ORDER Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The case set up by the complainant/respondent was that some cheques were given by the appellant for the purchase of components of DG sets. These cheques were dishonoured. According to the appellant, four cheques were given as ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 311 of the Code for producing additional witnesses and documents. This application was disallowed by the trial court and a revision was filed by the complainant/respondent and that revision was allowed by the Sessions Court on 03.11.2012. Pursuant to the order passed by the Sessions Judge, the statement of CW 3 was recorded on 07.11.2012. In his statement, CW 3 produced two documents, that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documents were not put to the appellant when his statement was recorded under Section 313 of the Code and, therefore, the High Court could not have convicted the appellant on this basis. In our opinion, the appellant is right in his contention. Since these documents were material, the appropriate course of action for the High Court was to remand the matter back to the trial court for recording a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
