Back
MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Pushkar Lal – Appellant
Versus
Narayan Lal Dangi – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present revision petitions under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C have been filed against the order dated 25.01.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Udaipur whereby, the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 391 Cr.P.C. for adducing evidence was dismissed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent lodged a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, against the petitioner, whereupon a case bearing no. 16532/2015 came to be registered against him before the learned Special Judicial Magistrate No. 1 (N.I. Act Cases), Udaipur. Thereafter, during the course of trial, the complainant-respondent in his cross-examination stated that his family had sold certain lands, in lieu of a consideration of Rs. 21,00,000/-, out of which a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- was given to the accused-petitioner. Thereafter, the accused-petitioner preferred an application under Sections 91 and 311 Cr.P.C. to bring on the record the respondent's bank statements for the year 2012-2013 and the sale deed of the lands in question. The learned Court below partly allowed the application vide order dated 19.01.2021, granting the pet
The appellate court's power to admit additional evidence under Section 391 Cr.P.C. is limited to exceptional cases where justice necessitates it, not as an afterthought post-trial.
The appellate court's power to admit additional evidence under Section 391 CrPC is limited to exceptional cases where justice necessitates it.
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 main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to record additional evidence under Section 391 Cr.P.C. should only be exercised when the party making such request was prevented fr....
Production of additional evidence – Powers under Section 391 of Cr.P.C. are to be exercised judiciously and not for mere asking.
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.
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.
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
