TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 485X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n dealing with the accounts of the accused company. Since the documents in question are relevant documents for the purpose of determining whether the petitioner was the director who was dealing and responsible for the day to day affairs of the accused company and the documents so produced before the Lower Court would be the documents of the petitioner himself therefore, it is for the petitioner to explain its creation in accordance with the law. - CRL.M.C. 5084/2015 and Crl.M.A.No.18321/2015 - - - Dated:- 3-11-2017 - MR. I.S. MEHTA J. Petitioner Through: Mr. Shiv Chopra and Mr. Mayank Mishra, Advocates. Respondents Through: Mr. Raghuvinder Varma, APP for State. Mr. Manoj Ohri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .12.2007, 19.12.2007 and 21.01.2009 for the amount of ₹ 40 lacs, ₹ 40 lacs and ₹ 25 lacs respectively which is duly reflected in the account book of the DD Global Capital Ltd.-accused No.1. The said amount so paid as a friendly loan was agreed and promised to be refundable after one year however, the said amounts have not been repaid. 4. It is further alleged in the complaint that the accused No.5/petitioner herein looks after the day to day working of the accused No.1/company relating to its legal affair, finances, sale of property and other aspects of it. Further, on repeated requests and demands the accused No.1-DD Township Ltd. issued four post dated cheques, i.e. (i) cheque No. 818258 dated 25.05.2011 of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2014 and this Court held that the petitioner can raise all the issues before the Trial court at the stage of framing of notice. 8. It is pertinent to mention here that the respondent No.2/complainant on 05.03.2015 moved an application for placing additional documents on record as those documents were not filed initially in the complaint as they were not available with the complainant at the time of filing of the complaint and at the time of pre-summoning evidence. 9. Consequently, vide order dated 26.10.2015 the learned Civil Judge, South East, Saket Court, New Delhi allowed the aforesaid application filed by the respondent no.2/complainant with an observation- ...that the documents appear to be relevant for the just decision of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . S. Sunaad Raghuram; (2015) 9 SSC 609. iv. Sanjay Gambhir vs. State and Anr. Crl.M.C.No.376/2016 decided on 11.05.2017. 11. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the prayer of the respondent No.2/complainant in the application impugned at para 49 is dated 05.03.2015 wherein the prayer made is to take on record the additional documents and pass appropriate orders thereon. He further submitted that this is not the appropriate stage to take on record the documents and he has no objection if the said documents is placed on record but not considered at the stage of Section 251 Cr.P.C. and he has objection for taking on record the said additional documents before the stage of Section 251 Cr.P.C. after disclosing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecord the additional documents, the character of the complaint will not be changed and it will remain the same. He further submits that the plea of the petitioner/accused regarding curtailing his right cannot be taken away in presence of the right of the accused to cross-examine the witnesses. The learned senior counsel has further submitted that the plea of right to curtail accused can t be taken, i.e. right to cross-examine. 14. The learned senior counsel for the respondent No.2/complainant has further submitted that the accused/petitioner cannot run away on his own. Reliance is placed upon the following judgments:- i. Rajaram Prasad Yadav vs. State od Bihar; AIR 2013 SC 3081. ii. P. Chhaganlal Daga vs. M. Sanjay Shaw; (20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st decision of the case. Power must be exercised judiciously and not capriciously or arbitrarily, as any improper or capricious exercise of such power may lead to undesirable results. An application Under Section 311 Code of Criminal Procedure must not be allowed only to fill up a lacuna in the case of the prosecution, or of the defence, or to the disadvantage of the accused, or to cause serious prejudice to the defence of the accused, or to give an unfair advantage to the opposite party. Further, the additional evidence must not be received as a disguise for retrial, or to change the nature of the case against either of the parties. Such a power must be exercised, provided that the evidence that is likely to be tendered by a witness, is ge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
