The petitioner-accused has filed this petition under

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for

short 'Cr.P.C.'), praying to quash the order dated

04.08.2023 passed in C.C. No.851/2018 (arising out of

P.C. No.248/2018) on the file of learned Principal Civil

Judge and J.M.F.C., Sindhnur, Raichur (for short 'trial

Court') and to allow the application filed under Section

311 of Cr.P.C.

- 3 -

2.

For the sake of convenience, the parties are

referred to as per their ranking before the trial Court. The

petitioner is accused and respondent is complainant.

3.

Brief facts of the case are that, respondent filed

a private complaint in P.C. No.248/2018 against accused

for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act (for short 'N.I. Act'); after recording

sworn statement of complainant, the trial Court took

cognizance and later it is numbered as C.C. No.851/2018.

The trial Court recorded evidence of complainant. On

21.07.2023, the trial Court closed the evidence of

complainant and taken the defence evidence as 'nil', thus,

posted the matter for argument on 04.08.2023. On

04.08.2023 the counsel for accused filed an application

under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., seeking permission to lead

defence evidence, but the trial Court without assigning any

reasons rejected the application and posted the matter for

argument. The order passed by the trial Court dated

04.08.2023 reads as under:

- 4 -

"Accused is absent. EA filed. Heard and

allowed. Counsel for accused filed appln. U/Sec.311

of Cr.P.C., for recalling D/E.

Counsel for complainant submitted that, IA

may be allowed on heavy cost. Heard and perused

the order sheet as per order dated 07.06.2023 this

Court

has

appointed

court

commissioner

for

recording the evidence of accused at Kundapur

Court. This Court has granted sufficient time, but

accused has not co-operated for execution of

commission warrant. Again this application is filed.

Therefore, the application is not maintainable.

Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER

The application filed by accused U/Sec.311 of

Cr.P.C. is rejected.

For argument.

Call at 2.45 P.M.

Sd/-

Prl.C.J. & JMFC, Sindhanur."

4.

On perusal of the order of the trial Court, it

appears

that

the

learned

counsel

appearing

for

complainant before trial Court though submitted his no

- 5 -

objections to allow I.A., the trial Court rejected the I.A.,

without assigning any reasons.

5.

The learned counsel for respondent-complainant

in this petition fairly submitted that he has no objection to

allow this petition, however, he submits that a suitable

direction be issued to trial Court to complete the defence

evidence, expeditiously.

6.

Admittedly,

the

petitioner

has

made

out

sufficient grounds to allow the petition. The application

filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., to lead defence

evidence cannot be dismissed and it has to be allowed and

thus, the Court has to follow liberal approach.

7.

In the instant case the trial Court has not

complied the provisions of Section 309 of Cr.P.C., and it

failed to afford fair opportunity to the accused to lead his

defence evidence, the trial Court proceeded to post the

matter for argument, thus erred in passing the impugned

order.

- 6 -

8.

The broad powers under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.,

are to be governed by requirement of justice. The power

must be exercised wherever the Court finds that any

evidence is essential for the just decision of the case.

9.

With the above observations, petition filed

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is allowed.

10. The order dated 04.08.2023 passed by the trial

Court is set aside. The application filed by the accused

under Section 311 of Cr.P.c., is allowed.

11. The accused is directed to appear before the

trial Court on or before 09.10.2023 without fail and lead

his defence evidence.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SBS

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18