Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ANJAN MONI KALITA
Bakradhar Keot, S/o. LT. Hirday Keot – Appellant
Versus
Anita Das, D/o. LT. Bhadra Kanta Das – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 2 , 7) |
| 2. contentions regarding error in the judgment. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. arguments on legal precedents related to submissions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. court's analysis of evidence submission. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. conclusion dismissing the revision petition. (Para 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
ANJAN MONI KALITA, J.
Heard Mr. S. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
2. The instant application has been filed, under Section 438/440 of BNSS, 2023, filed assailing the Judgment & Order dated 17.01.2025, passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Nagaon in Criminal Revision No. 26/2024 in connection with N.I. Case No. 21/2019, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, whereby the revision petition was found devoid of merit and accordingly, dismissed on contest.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent has taken a preliminary objection in filing of the instant application, stating that this petition has been filed under the guise of Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, though actually the application is in the nature of second c
Evidence submitted by affidavit by an accused in a NI case is impermissible, reinforcing the need for oral evidence as per existing legal principles.
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.
The court established that under Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, only complainants can provide evidence via affidavit, not the accused.
Accused facing trial in a complaint under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act are not competent to tender their evidence through affidavit.
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.
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 emphasized the importance of documentary evidence, witness testimony, and the presumption of a legally enforceable debt under Sec. 139 of the N.I. Act in establishing the guilt of the accus....
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
