Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Madan Awasthi – Appellant
Versus
Rajeev Kohli – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present petition has been directed against the order dated 03.06.2025 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Manali, District Kullu, H.P. (learned Trial Court) vide which the evidence of the petitioner(complainant before the learned Trial Court) was closed by the order of the court. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the complainant filed a complaint before the learned Trial Court for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I. Act).
3. Learned Trial Court found sufficient reason to summon the accused and ordered the issuance of a summons.
4. The matter was listed for the complainant’s evidence on 10.03.2025 and was adjourned on the request of learned counsel for the complainant for 03.06.2025. The complainant is an aged person and he is suffering from various ailments. He filed his affidavit, but could not appear for cross- examination. The learned Trial Court closed the evidence by the order of the Court without apprec
Trial courts justified in closing defence evidence after adjournments exceeding statutory limit of two under BNSS Section 346; fair trial does not permit endless adjournments defeating speedy justice....
The court condemns the misuse of adjournments and emphasizes the importance of timely justice delivery. It calls for a change in work culture to discourage unnecessary adjournments and maintain the r....
The main legal point established is the strict adherence to Section 309 of Cr.P.C., requiring expeditious trials and continuous examination of witnesses, with adjournments only granted for special re....
The right to cross-examine witnesses must be exercised promptly, and adjournments should only be granted for compelling reasons to ensure a fair trial.
(1) Adjournment – Impediment in speedy trial – Legislature itself has frowned at granting adjournment on flimsy grounds – Even in cases where accused had been enlarged on bail right to a speedy trial....
The court reinforced that adjournments in criminal trials should be granted sparingly and only for valid reasons, emphasizing the importance of timely cross-examination.
Accused have a right to represent themselves through a pleader but cannot cross-examine witnesses using non-advocates without court permission, ensuring procedural integrity.
The main legal point established is that once the examination of a witness begins, the trial should proceed continuously, with adjournments only granted for the strongest possible reasons, and the du....
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
