← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/10122/2019dismissed

Surinder Kumar v. Anil Kumar And Other

2019-05-06Mr. Justice Ramendra Jain2 pages

CRM-M-10122-2019 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-10122-2019 DECIDED ON: 06.05.2019 SURINDER KUMAR ...PETITIONER..

VERSUS

ANIL KUMAR SAINI AND ANR.

...RESPONDENTS..

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN Present: Mr. Sunil Kumar Bhoria, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***** RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL) Through this petition, challenge has been laid to order dated 08.01.2019 (P-1), whereby revisional court, dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner for setting aside order dated 11.10.2018 (P-2) of the trial court, dismissing his application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling the complainant for further cross-examination. Briefly, in a complaint filed by respondent-complainant against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, "Act"), on the date of final arguments, the petitioner by changing his counsel moved an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall the respondent-complainant for his further crossexamination. Heard.

SONIKA 2019.05.09 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-10122-2019 --2-- The cases under Section 138 of the Act are mainly to be decided on the basis of affidavit and counter affidavit. Perusal of impugned orders of both the courts below shows that after recording the statement of the petitioner under Section 313 Cr.P.C., several opportunities were afforded to him to conclude his evidence, but he did not ever opt to summon the complainant afresh for further cross-examination. It is only at the stage of final arguments, the petitioner by changing his counsel, came forward by moving an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall the respondentcomplainant for further cross-examination, which certainly amounts to gross abuse of the process of law.

I have gone through the impugned orders and find no illegality and infirmity in the same. Hence, the same are upheld. As such, the instant petition is dismissed.

06.05.2019 (RAMENDRA JAIN) sonika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No SONIKA 2019.05.09 17:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh