Akshay Kumar v. Sanjeev Jain
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Delhi, exercising powers under Section 482 CrPC, allowed the petitioner one opportunity to examine witness Raj Kumar in a Section 138 NI Act trial. The Court denied requests for other witnesses, ordering the payment of Rs. 10,000 to the respondent for inconvenience.
What did the court decide?
Allowed the petitioner to produce witness Raj Kumar on the next hearing date, subject to payment of Rs. 10,000 costs to the respondent.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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.
$~
*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**
- CRL.M.C. 1041/2016 & Crl.M.A.4471/2016
AKSHAY KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through Ms. Surinder Kaur, Advocate
versus
SANJEEV JAIN ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Ansar Ahmad, Advocate
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
S.P.GARG, J. (ORAL)
- Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated 04.02.2016 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Crl.Rev.P.No.05/2016 by which the order of learned Metropolitan Magistrate dated 11.12.2015 declining to accept application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was upheld. The petition is contested by the respondent.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to permit the petitioner to produce additional defense witnesses different from those listed earlier.
Whether to allow the petitioner to produce the witness Raj Kumar who was unable to appear due to a relative's death.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Akshay Kumar
- respondent
Sanjeev Jain
Coram
S.P. Garg
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court