SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Bom) 1725

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
M.S. Karnik, J.
Geeta Kamkar - Appellant
Versus
Ramadevi Korepali - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 326 of 2023(Filing)
Decided On : 05-06-2023

Advocates appeared:
Abdul Rajak Walikar, Advocate, Veena Vaman Ghode, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
A party must demonstrate diligence in presenting evidence, but courts may grant additional opportunities to file evidence in the interest of justice, subject to conditions such as the payment of costs.

Headnote:

ADJOURNMENT - DEFENCE EVIDENCE - The court addressed the rejection of the petitioner's request for adjournment, emphasizing the importance of timely filing of evidence. The court found that the petitioner had sufficient time to obtain necessary documents and that the trial court acted within its discretion. However, in the interest of justice, the court allowed the petitioner a final opportunity to file the affidavit-in-evidence, contingent upon the payment of costs.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenged the trial court's order rejecting her application for adjournment, which resulted in the closure of her defence evidence. The petitioner claimed she needed more time to obtain certified documents from the bank to support her case.

Finding of the Court:

The court acknowledged the trial court's concerns regarding the petitioner's casual approach to filing the affidavit-in-evidence. Despite recognizing some merit in the respondent's arguments, the court decided to allow the petitioner a final opportunity to file the necessary documents, given that they had become available after the impugned order.

Issues: Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the petitioner's request for adjournment and closing her defence evidence, and whether the petitioner should be granted another opportunity to file her affidavit-in-evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while the trial court acted within its discretion in managing the proceedings, the interests of justice warranted granting the petitioner a final opportunity to present her evidence, provided she complied with the condition of paying costs.

Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, allowing the petitioner to file her affidavit-in-evidence by 12/6/2023, contingent upon the payment of costs to the respondent.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The challenge in this petition is to the order dtd. 18/4/2023 passed by the trial Court rejecting the application made by the petitioner-accused for adjournment which had the effect of closing the defence evidence of the petitioner.

3. Having perused the impugned order, I do find substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent that the petitioner has been casual in her approach in the matter of filing the affidavit-in-evidence. A request was made for adjournment on 18/4/2023 for the reason that the affidavit-in-evidence could not be completed as the accused had to obtain certified documents from the bank on which the accused wants to rely. The trial Court passed the following Order:- 'Final opportunity was given on 24/1/2023. Even thereafter on account of medical grounds, opportunity was given on costs. Despite that no AIE is filed on the pretext obtaining documents. I do not see bonafide as the accused had sufficient time to obtain such documents. Hence, rejected. Defence evidence stands closed.'

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in fact, the petitioner had prayed for a week's time to file the affidavit-in-evidence. The documents which the petitioner wanted to rely upon were applied for some time in March 2023 and were made available to the petitioner on 26/4/2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was no intention to protract the proceedings. Though I do find some substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent and even the approach of the trial Court cannot be faulted, in the interest of justice and as now the documents are available post the passing of the impugned order, only by way of an indulgence, the petition deserves to be allowed, subject, however, to costs.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a categoric statement that affidavit-in-evidence will be positively filed on or before 12/6/2023 with an advance copy to the respondent. It is made clear that if the affidavit-in-evidence is not filed on or before 12/6/2023, the impugned order shall stand.

6. The impugned order is set aside subject to payment of cost of ?2, 000/- by the petitioner to the respondent which shall be a condition precedent for filing the affidavit-inevidence of the petitioner on record.

7. The petition is disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top