Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. SUJANA
Nikhil Subash Anand – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for quashing a docket order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding admissibility of evidence. (Para 3 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis of submissions and legal precedent. (Para 4 , 5 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. dismissal of the criminal petition. (Para 13) |
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 4 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) to quash the docket order dated 13.03.2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No.201 of 2022 in C.C.No.1558 of 2019 on the file of I-Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nizamabad.
2. Crl.M.P.No.201 of 2022 is filed by the complainant/2nd respondent herein under Section 294 of Cr.P.C, to receive the original authorization letter issued by the Vice President (Finance) and Company Secretary, Sukjith Starch and Chemicals Limited. It is stated that the said document is necessary to be received and marked as exhibit in support of the evidence on behalf of petitioner and failure thereof would cause irreparable loss to the petitioner therein. As such, prayed the trial Court to receive the petition mentioned document.
3. In the counter filed by the respondents/accused i
Re-examination of witnesses is strictly permitted for clarification of cross-examination issues; introducing new documents afterwards undermines procedural integrity.
The court affirmed the right to present necessary evidence for just adjudication, overturning previous dismissals of critical authorization documents.
The court held that foundational documents essential for a just decision in a cheque dishonor case must be admitted, emphasizing the broad powers under Section 311 Cr.P.C.
The aim of every Court has to discover the truth. Section 311 of the Code is one of many such provisions of the Code which strengthen the arms of a Court in its effort to ferret out the truth by proc....
Appellate court cannot allow recall of witness under Section 311 CrPC for cross-examination omitted due to accused's fault at trial.
The court's acknowledgment of the procedural readiness for cross-examination reinforces the necessity of allowing fair trial practices under criminal procedure.
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
