Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. Nirmal Kumar, J
Bamini S – Appellant
Versus
Divya Mahendran – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to trial court allowing additional documents during ongoing criminal trial. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court discretion in permitting document production to ensure best evidence is presented, subject to cross-examination. (Para 4 , 5) |
Order
The petitioners/accused, challenging the order passed by the trial court in STC.No.4223 of 2024 dated 13.03.2026 directing the respondent/complainant to mark the bank statement and income tax returns, have filed this quash petition.
2. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the respondent/complainant cannot be permitted to fill up the lacuna in the case, and that too, after the detailed cross-examination conducted by the petitioners, wherein questions were raised regarding the bank statements and income tax returns which would only pre-close the defence of the petitioners/accused. 3. Considering the submissions and perusal of the materials, it is seen that the petitioners are facing trial for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in STC.No.4223 of 2024. The petitioner had cross-examined PW1/complainant in detail. During the course of cross examination, the financial capacity of the resp
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
