IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that the accused has the right to file a written statement under Section 313 of the Cr.PC. even after a delay, provided it does not prejudice the complainant, reinforcing the principle of fairness in criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. The Petitioner has filed the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pune, which was numbered as Summary Criminal Case No.602 of 2012. The criminal complaint relates to dishonour of cheques issued towards alleged liability for supply of treatment plant. The total value of four cheques which were dishonoured was Rs.2,00,00,000/- (Rupees two crores). The complainant issued demand notice which was followed by filing of complaint. The process was issued, plea was recorded, the trial has commenced, evidence of complainant was recorded. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure on 22nd September, 2015. The accused had stated that, he is going to submit written statement. The respondent No.2 examined himself as defence witness No.1, on 5th November, 2015. He was cross-examined on 14th July, 2016 and 5th November, 2016. The cross-examination was not concluded and it was adjourned on the request of Advocate for the complainant. Subsequently the complainant/Petitioner preferred an application before the trial Court on 3rd March, 2017 seeking directions to the accused to produce the original or certified copies of the documents mentioned in the said application. Vide order dated 24th July, 2017, learned Magistrate directed the accused to produce the documents referred to in the said order. The complainant filed application for issuance of witness summons on 13th October, 2017. In the said application it was contended that, on the basis of the examination in-chief of the accused, detailed cross-examination was conducted on behalf of the complainant, and in response to the question asked in the cross-examination, the accused has admitted the possession and custody of documents and shown willingness to produce those documents. Accordingly the complainant filed an application for production of the documents mentioned therein from the custody of accused. The said application was allowed. However, despite order passed by Court the accused avoided to produce documents. Those documents are necessary for the pusepose of further cross-examination of the accused and also to enable the Court to decide the fact is issue and other relevant facts summons be issued to Commissioner of Sales Tax Department, for the purpose of producing the documents. The learned Magistrate vide order dated 18th January, 2018 allowed the application preferred by complainant and issued witness summons for production of documents. On 16th March, 2021 the accused filed written statement under Section 313 of Cr.PC. The Petitioner raised objection by filing on 13th November, 2021 for taking written statements of accused on record. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pune rejected the said written statement of the accused vide order dated 31st December, 2021. The respondent/accused challenged the said order by preferring criminal Revision Application No. 41 of 2022 before the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 11th May, 2022 set aside the order dated 31st December, 2021 and directed the trial Court to take written statement of the accused on record and consider it alongwith statement at Exhibit-108 recorded under Section 313 of Cr.PC. while final adjudication.

2. The Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 11th May, 2022 passed by the Sessions Court and hence preferred this Petition challenging the said order.

3. Learned Advocate for the Petitioner submitted as under:-

i. Learned Sessions Judge has committed error in setting aside the order passed by the learned Magistrate rejecting the written statement tendered by respondent No.2.

ii. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.PC. on 22nd September, 2015. Although the accused had stated that, he would file written statement, he waited for a period of abut six years and than submitted the writ