Back
TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
S. Satyvathi – Appellant
Versus
K. Venkateswarlu – Respondent
ORDER
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-appellant-accused seeking to quash the order dated 25.07.2025 passed in Crl. M.P. No.22 of 2023 in Crl. A. No.859 of 2017 by the III Additional District Judge, L.B. Nagar, R.R. District, filed under Section 391 Cr. P.C., wherein the said petition was dismissed.
2. Heard Mr. V. Venkata Subramanyam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A Ravinder Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri Ch. Venkateshwara Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the de facto complainant has filed a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short ‘NI Act’) before the trial court against the petitioner herein and the trial court has passed judgment of conviction against the petitioner without going into the material placed on record and that aggrieved by the said judgment, an appeal is filed before the appellate Court and the said appeal is pending vide Crl.A. No.859 of 2017 on the file of III Additional District Judge. In the said appeal, the petitioner has preferred an application under Section 391 Cr. P.C., praying the court to receive certain additional evidence. The
Production of additional evidence – Appellate court ought not to have assumed things and drawn adverse inference as against documents that are proposed to be received in evidence.
The admission of additional evidence under Section 391 Cr.P.C. is justified only in exceptional circumstances where not doing so may lead to a miscarriage of justice.
The court reinforced that under Section 391 Cr.P.C., additional evidence may be admitted to prevent failure of justice, emphasizing the need for fair consideration of crucial documents.
The power to receive additional evidence under Section 391 of the Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases where it is necessary for rendering substantial justice.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the power to record additional evidence under Section 391 CrPC should be exercised with caution and circumspection, and the party seeking t....
The appellate court's power to admit additional evidence under Section 391 CrPC is limited to exceptional cases where justice necessitates it.
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
