SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9682

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J
P.SATHYA – Appellant
Versus
S.BHUVANESWARI – Respondent


COMMON ORDER

These petitions have been filed challenging the order passed by the Court below dismissing the applications filed in Crl MP No.16165 of

2023 under Section 311 of Cr.PC and Crl MP No.16164 of 2023, under Section 91 of Cr.PC.

2. The petitioner is facing trial for offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The respondent / complainant examined himself as PW1. She was cross-examined in part on 21.03.2023. Thereafter, due to paucity of time, the case was adjourned. However, during the next hearing, she was not cross-examined. Hence, the evidence of PW1 was closed. The petitioner therefore filed an application under Section 311 of Cr.PC to recall PW1 for further cross examination.

3. The petitioner also relied upon a statement that was made by the respondent during cross examination that she is in possession of a dairy in which she has recorded all the transactions. Hence, the petitioner sought for a direction to the respondent to produce the said dairy by filing an application under Section 91 of Cr.PC.

4. The Court below dismissed both the applications and aggrieved by the same, these Criminal Original petitions have been filed before this Court.

5. Heard Mr.P

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top