The main legal point established in the judgment is the essentiality of evidence for a just decision, as provided under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT :

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.

1. The present revision has been preferred against an Order dated 06.04.2023 passed by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 14th Court, Calcutta in connection with Complaint Case No. 34911 of 2009 which had been initiated in the backdrop of an alleged commission of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the opposite party no. 2 herein, thereby rejecting the petitioner's prayer under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for recalling of Prosecution Witness No. 1.

2. The petitioner is a private limited company and has initiated proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the opposite party no. 2.

3. The case in the petition of complaint is that the petitioner was carrying on its business of mining of granites. The opposite party no. 2 approached the petitioner to provide her with financial assistance for the purpose of expanding her business, which she carried on with her other family members. The petitioner, in good faith, provided financial assistance to the Opposite Party No. 2 from time to time. The opposite party no. 2, in partial discharge of her existing debts and/or liabilities, issued to the petitioner, an account payee cheque bearing no. 713379 dated 10.11.2008, drawn on Axis Bank Limited, Burra Bazar, for a sum of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- (Two Crore Rupees only), which, upon being deposited for encashment by the petitioner with its banker within its validity period was returned unpaid vide cheque return memo dated 04.05.2009, being dishonoured by the banker of the Opposite Party No. 2 for the reason "Funds Insufficient". A demand notice dated 19.05.2009, in terms with Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was issued by the petitioner and the same was received by the opposite party no. 2 herein on 21.05.2009, but was not replied thereto.

4. It is further submitted that the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 are accuseds in Special CBI Case No. 22 of 2010, initiated on two complaints dated 14.03.2009 made by the General Manager, Zonal Office, Central Bank of India, Kolkata, alleging offences punishable under Section 120B read with Sections 420/409/468/471/477A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which has ended in charge sheet and now pending before the learned 3rd Special Judge, CBI, Bankshall Court, Calcutta.

5. In connection to the said case, the CBI conducted a search at the premises belonging to the Opposite Party No.2 and/or her husband located at 136, Cotton Street, 1st floor, Utkalmoni Gopabandhu Sarani, Kolkata - 700007 on 04.04.2009 at about 15:00 hrs. In the course of conducting such a search, the CBI seized multiple documents and articles from the Opposite Party No.2. A seizure list, stating therein the details of documents and the articles seized by the CBI at the said premises on 04.04.2009 in connection with the aforementioned Special CBI Case no. 22 of 2010 was prepared.

6. The petitioner further submits that the following documents were also seized among others by the seizure list dated 04.04.2009 from the premises of the opposite party no. 2:-