submittted as follows. The petitioner was the accused in this case. The complainant/opposite party had filed the present complaint case, inter alia , on the allegations that despite receiving some payments for supply of Iron Ore Fines, the accused failed to supply the same and in part discharge of existing liability towards the complainant company, issued the cheque in question, but the same was dishonoured. First, the accused actually supplied the goods that he was supposed to supply. It was the petitioner’s further case that the cheque in question was forcibly taken by the complainant. Although, the issue of forcibly taking of the cheque was mentioned during examination on the accused under Section 313 of the Code, the details of the supply of goods were not referred to. However, one defence was not incompatible with the other. Acting in good faith, the accused made an application under the Right to Information Act in 2017 for obtaining information about contemporaneous documents for the supply of goods in question from the concerned Customs and Central Excise Authority of Andhra Pradesh. This was because the accused had misplaced the receipt/challan that was issued to him for the said supply of goods. Copies of such receipt or challan and/or any contemporaneous documents for the supply of goods were supposed to be there with the said authority. However, no information was furnished to the accused on the ground that it pertained to trade related transactions between private parties. This compelled the accused to make an application before the learned Trial Court under Section 91 of the Code praying for a direction upon the Joint Commissioner of Customs, Krishnapatnam Customs House, KAPC Building, Krishnapatnam Port, Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh to produce the concerned Shipping
