Back
JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Rajinder Trehan – Appellant
Versus
Hdfc Bank Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. (Oral). - The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 Cr.PC is for quashing of Order dated 06.04.2022 (Annexure P-8) passed by the learned JMIC, Amritsar in complaint bearing No.NACT1780/17.04.2017 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, District Amritsar titled HDFC Bank Vs. EMM EMM Constructions vide which the application moved by the petitioner/accused under Section 311 Cr.PC has been dismissed.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent-HDFC Bank filed a complaint under Section 138 against the petitioner being the authorised signatory of M/s EMM EMM Constructions with the allegations that the firm had availed a loan facility from the Bank and in order to discharge the loan amount the petitioner had issued a post date cheque in favour of the complainant Bank which on presentation was dishonoured on the ground of insufficiency of funds. Based on the said complaint the trial Court summoned the petitioner to face the trial for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
3. Initially the complaint was filed through Bhupinder Singh, Manager Legal as authorised signatory of the bank. Subsequently the com
The court emphasized that the power under Section 311 Cr.PC should be used judiciously and not as a means to delay proceedings or fill up lacunae in the prosecution's case.
The court emphasized that the power to recall witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously, ensuring it is essential for a just decision and not merely to fill gaps or delay proc....
The court emphasized that the power to recall witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously, ensuring it is essential for a just decision and not merely to fill gaps in evidence.
The court upheld the dismissal of an application to recall a witness under Section 311 Cr.P.C., emphasizing the need for judicious use of this power to ensure fair trials without unnecessary delays.
The Court has the discretion to summon witnesses or recall and re-examine any person if their evidence appears to be essential to the just decision of the case, as per Section 311 Cr.P.C. This power ....
A change of counsel does not justify recalling a witness for further cross-examination; sufficient grounds must be shown to avoid delaying proceedings.
The court affirmed that under Section 311 CrPC, the recall of witnesses is permissible to ensure justice and allow the accused to present a complete defence, emphasizing the necessity of evidence for....
The court emphasized the essentiality of evidence for a just decision and the duty of the court to ensure a fair trial.
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
