A criminal W.P. was filed to quash an order recalling the complainant for re-examination in an Section 138 NI Act case. The accused argued the recall was to fill lacuna to prove the account was joint. The Court held the factual aspect was a matter of record and no prejudice was caused, dismissing the petition.
No order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
J.10-wp.457.22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.457 OF 2022
Ravindra s/o Vitthalrao Uike Aged about 40 years, Occ. Service, R/o. C/o Mr. Shera, near Dr. Gore’s Clinic, Near Masjid, Ashti Sh. Tahsil Ashti, District Wardha
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Suresh s/o Rambhauji Agrawal Aged about 66 years, Occ. Agriculturist, R/o. House No.1022, Gajanan Township, Kathora, Amravati Tahsil and District Amravati
...RESPONDENT
Shri K.J. Topale, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri R.N. Ghuge, Advocate for the respondent.
CORAM : VINAY JOSHI, J. DATED : 03.10.2022.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
RULE . Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by
consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
2
J.10-wp.457.22.odt
therefore, the petitioner (accused) is before this Court.
3
J.10-wp.457.22.odt
the complainant by suggesting that his name is not mentioned in the said bank account. The complainant though admitted that the account extract does not bear his name as account holder, however, he explained that it is a joint account. The recall is sought only for the reason to establish that the account where the cheque was dis-hounoured, was a joint account meaning thereby it was not the account standing in the sole name of his wife. It is a matter of record, as to whether, it was a sole account or a joint account. Moreover, the cheque was issued in the name of the complainant, therefore, naturally the account must be joint since the bank has accepted the cheque. In order to bring the said factual aspect on record the recall is sought and, therefore, there is no question of filling up lacuna.
4
J.10-wp.457.22.odt
petition stands dismissed. No order as to costs.
(VINAY JOSHI, J.)
Trupti
TRUPTI SANTOSHJI AGRAWAL
07.10.2022 18:38
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Magistrate was right in recalling the complainant for re-examination to clarify if the bank account was joint or sole.
Whether the accused was caused prejudice by the recall application being allowed after cross-examination.
Whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the criminal writ petition challenging the recall order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ravindra s/o Vitthalrao Uike
Suresh s/o Rambhauji Agrawal
Vinay Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
