Back
M. NAGAPRASANNA
Zaheda Inamdhar, W/o. Sherkhan M. Inamdhar – Appellant
Versus
Fatima Hassina Sayeedha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of cheque dishonour case. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. introduction of the case and statutory provisions. (Para 2) |
| 3. arguments regarding affidavit evidence. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. court's analysis of affidavit admissibility. (Para 6 , 7 , 10) |
| 5. accused cannot tender evidence via affidavit. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 6. final order quashing affidavit evidence by accused. (Para 11) |
ORDER :
(M. Nagaprasanna, J.) :
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question proceedings of recording of evidence of the accused by way of an affidavit in C.C.No.27337 of 2027 pending before the 22nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengalore arising out of a complaint filed under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C., alleging offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘the Act’ for short) and has sought quashment of the order dated 13-12-2023 which rejects Section 311 Cr.P.C. application filed by the petitioner seeking further cross-examination of the respondent/accused.
2. Heard Sri P.P. Hegde, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri M.N.Umesh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:-
The petitioner and
The accused is not entitled to provide evidence via affidavit under the Negotiable Instruments Act; such a right is exclusively reserved for the complainant to ensure a fair trial.
The right to provide evidence via affidavit under section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is exclusively granted to the complainant, and the accused does not possess this right.
In proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the accused cannot provide evidence via affidavit and must request in writing to testify, adhering to strict procedural compliance.
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : Yashpal Thakur, Mukund Pandya For the Respondent : Amit Palkar, Mukesh Modi
The court established that under Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, only complainants can provide evidence via affidavit, not the accused.
An accused in a proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be permitted to file an Affidavit-of-Evidence in lieu of Examination-in-Chief.
Section 145(2) of Act, clearly reveals that Court on receipt of application of prosecution or accused has no option but to summon and examine any person giving evidence on affidavit as to facts conta....
Accused in Section 138 of N.I. Act case, cannot be permitted to give his evidence by way of affidavit, like complainant, in view of Section 145 of N.I. Act.
Section 311 CrPC reads as power to summon material witness, or examine person present.
The court reinforced that under the Negotiable Instruments Act, an accused must file a specific application to recall a witness for cross-examination, failing which the trial can proceed without such....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
