Back
ARUN MONGA
Neelam – Appellant
Versus
Veena – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Arun Monga, J. (Oral)
This is a petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of impugned order dated 21.02.2023 (Annexure P- 5) passed by learned JMIC, Ludhiana, in COMA/24664/2019 dated 31.07.2019 titled 'Neelam v. Veena' whereby evidence of the complainant/petitioner was closed as well as quashing of order dated 14.07.2023 (Annexure P-7) whereby his application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling of the petitioner for her cross-examination, was dismissed.
2. Succinct facts first, as pleaded in the instant petition.
2.1 A complaint under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'NI Act'), was filed by petitioner against the respondent, who was known to her. It was alleged that respondent approached the complainant/petitioner for some financial help to the tune of Rs 2,65,000/- and in the month of January 2019, petitioner gave the above said amount to the respondent. Respondent in order to discharge her legally enforceable debt, issued one cheque of Rs.2,65,000/- in favour of the petitioner but same was returned unpaid by the banker of the respondent with remarks 'Funds insufficient'. I
The right to cross-examine can be forfeited through negligence, and courts may reject applications to recall such rights if the accused fails to act timely.
The court upheld the dismissal of a petition for failing to cross-examine the complainant, emphasizing the importance of compliance with court orders and procedural timelines.
The court held that under Section 145 of the NI Act, the accused must be allowed to cross-examine the complainant before recording their plea of defence, ensuring the fairness of the trial process.
The essentiality of evidence is the touchstone for allowing an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., and even if allowing the application amounts to filling up a lacuna, it should not be an absolute....
The right to cross-examine a complainant is essential for a fair trial, and its denial violates principles of natural justice and Article 21 of the Constitution.
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
