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

2024 Supreme(Online)(RJ) 24240

[2024:RJ-JP:20146]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2579/2024 Arihant Steel, Jaipur Through Proprietor Naresh Jain S/o Vimal Prasad Jain, R/o 502, White House, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur, Raj.

----Petitioner Versus Om Sales, Bundi Through Proprietor Vineet Goyal S/o Shripal Goyal, R/o House No. 1A36, Vikas Nagar, Housing Board, Bundi, Raj.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Joshi Mr. Vikas Somani HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Order

30/04/2024 The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C against order dated 23.04.2024, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate no.2, Bundi in complaint no. 2199/2017 whereby, application filed by the petitioner for granting two months time to produce the defence evidence has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has received some relevant information from the Transport Department by way of filing an application before them to inquire about the truck numbers mentioned by the complainant in the bills. As per the information received by the petitioner from the Transport Department, it appears that truck numbers mentioned by complainant in the bills are not registered with the Transport Department. It is stated that no goods were supplied to the petitioner by the complainant. He submits that some information which has been sought from the Transport Department are still awaited.

With the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, counsel prays that one opportunity may be given to the petitioner to produce the defence evidence.

From bare perusal of the record, it appears that four opportunity were granted to the petitioner to produce the defence evidence but petitioner did not avail the opportunities and vide order dated 26.10.2023, defence evidence was closed. Thereafter, three opportunities were given to the petitioner to submit his arguments but rather than arguing the case on merits, an application was filed by him on 24.03.2024 for granting him permission to produce defence evidence but the said application was rejected by the learned trial court.

Considering the reasons given by learned trial court, I do not find any force in the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

However, at this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner may be allowed to examine himself as defence witness under Section 315 Cr.P.C.

Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an appropriate application under Section 315 Cr.P.C before the learned trial court to examine himself as competent witness on or before 13.05.2024. Upon filing such application, the learned trial court shall give one opportunity to the accused petitioner to examine himself as defence witness. It is made clear that this liberty is limited only for examination of the accused petitioner as defence witness. Further, only one opportunity shall be given to the accused petitioner to examine himself as defence witness. If the petitioner fails to appear and conclude his evidence as defence witness in one go, this order shall lose its currency.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of.

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /58

Powerd by TCPDF (w.tcpdf.org)

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top