Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
VALMIKI MENEZES
Conroy J.F. De Melo, Son of Adv. Fortunato De Melo – Appellant
Versus
Civilco Engineers & Associates – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of complaints under section 138. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. requirements for permitting cross-examination and leading evidence. (Para 5 , 9 , 16) |
| 3. discussion on the inadequacies in the accused's application for evidence. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. prohibitions against evidence via affidavit under ni act. (Para 10 , 15 , 18) |
| 5. identification of procedural errors by the magistrate. (Para 11) |
| 6. clarification on the procedural requirement for the accused's evidence. (Para 12 , 13 , 19) |
| 7. final directive for procedural compliance established. (Para 14) |
| 8. final orders including mandate for trial completion. (Para 20 , 21) |
JUDGMENT :
VALMIKI MENEZES, J.
1. Registry to waive office objections and register the matters.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, petitions are disposed of finally.
3. These two petitions impugn orders dated 06.12.2024 respectively, passed in Criminal Case Nos.OA/30/2020 and OA/925/2019 by the J.M.F.C., A-Court, Ponda. By the impugned orders, the J.M.F.C. has dismissed an application filed by the Petitioner, the original Accused in these proceedings, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and refused leave to the Accu
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.
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.
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.
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : Yashpal Thakur, Mukund Pandya For the Respondent : Amit Palkar, Mukesh Modi
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.
The court established that under Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, only complainants can provide evidence via affidavit, not the accused.
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....
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....
Accused facing trial in a complaint under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act are not competent to tender their evidence through affidavit.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility of the accused's evidence on affidavit in a Section 138 proceeding under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and the nature ....
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
