Allowed

M/S Samrat Heavens Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Satinder Kumar Gupta

Delhi HC15 Feb 2024CRL.M.C./654/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble High Court of Delhi allowed petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the closure of the petitioners' right to cross-examine witnesses in cases arising from the same cheque dishonour transaction. The Court restored the right to cross-examine, set aside imposed costs, and disposed of pending applications.

What did the court decide?

Right of cross-examination restored; cost of Rs.1,00,000/- set aside; composite cost of Rs.50,000/- and earlier cost of Rs.10,000/- directed to be paid.

M/S Samrat Heavens Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs… — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~61 to 70

¶2

*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**

¶3

% Date of Decision: 15.02.2024

¶4

- CRL.M.C. 654/2024, CRL.M.C. 655/2024, CRL.M.C. 656/2024, CRL.M.C. 657/2024, CRL.M.C. 658/2024, CRL.M.C. 659/2024, CRL.M.C. 660/2024, CRL.M.C. 661/2024, CRL.M.C. 662/2024 and CRL.M.C. 663/2024

¶5

IN THE MATTER OF

¶6

M/S SAMRAT HEAVENS INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Pramod Kr.Dubey, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Siddharth Narang, Mr.Chaitanya Singh, Mr.Shashank Dewan, Ms.Amrita Vats and Mr.Vaibhav Kapur, Advocates.

¶7

versus

¶8

SATINDER KUMAR GUPTA ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Deepank Yadav, Advocate

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA % J U D G M E N T

¶11

ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)

¶12

CRL.M.A. 2711/2024 in CRL.M.C. 654/2024, CRL.M.A. 2713/2024 in CRL.M.C. 655/2024, CRL.M.A. 2715/2024 in CRL.M.C. 656/2024, CRL.M.A. 2717/2024 in CRL.M.C. 657/2024, CRL.M.A. 2719/2024 in CRL.M.C. 658/2024, CRL.M.A. 2721/2024 in CRL.M.C. 659/2024, CRL.M.A. 2723/2024 in CRL.M.C. 660/2024, CRL.M.A. 2725/2024 in CRL.M.C. 661/2024, CRL.M.A. 2727/2024 in CRL.M.C. 662/2024, CRL.M.A. 2729/2024 in CRL.M.C. 663/2024

¶13

Signature Not Verified

¶14

CRL.M.C. 654/2024 & etc.

¶15

Page 1 of 5

¶16

Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 1.02.2024 16:04:22

¶17

Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. Applications stand disposed of.

¶18

CRL.M.C. 654/2024 & CRL.M.A. 2710/2024, CRL.M.C. 655/2024 & CRL.M.A. 2712/2024, CRL.M.C. 656/2024 & CRL.M.A. 2714/2024, CRL.M.C. 657/2024 & CRL.M.A. 2716/2024, CRL.M.C. 658/2024 & CRL.M.A. 2718/2024, CRL.M.C. 659/2024 & CRL.M.A. 2720/2024, CRL.M.C. 660/2024 & CRL.M.A. 2722/2024, CRL.M.C. 661/2024 & CRL.M.A. 2724/2024, CRL.M.C. 662/2024 & CRL.M.A. 2726/2024, CRL.M.C. 663/2024 & CRL.M.A. 2728/2024

¶19

1. Ten separate petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’) have been preferred on behalf of the petitioners challenging the order dated 23.08.2023 passed by learned ASJ, North-West, Rohini Courts, Delhi and order dated 28.04.2023 passed by learned MM (NI Act) (North-West), Rohini Courts, Delhi.

¶20

2. Issue notice. Learned counsel for the respondent appears on advance notice and accepts notice.

¶21

3. The grievance of the petitioners is that the right of cross-examination of the petitioner, who is an accused in the proceedings under Section 138 of N.I. Act was closed in the concerned complaint cases preferred on behalf of the respondent.

¶22

4. In brief, as per the case of the petitioners, separate complaint cases arising out of the same transaction between the parties were filed within a span of twelve months. The aforesaid cases pending before different districts were finally transferred vide order dated 04.03.2023 by this Court to District (North-West).

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

CRL.M.C. 654/2024 & etc.

¶25

Page 2 of 5

¶26

Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 1.02.2024 16:04:22

¶27

An application preferred by the petitioners under Sections 220 read with Section 223 Cr.P.C. seeking clubbing of all the aforesaid cases arising out of the same transaction, was dismissed by learned MM vide order dated 11.01.2023, against which Criminal Revision Petition No.211/2023 was preferred. In the meanwhile, during the pendency of aforesaid Revision Petition, the learned MM closed the right of cross-examination of the petitioners in all the 10 complaint cases vide order dated 28.04.2023. A Criminal Revision Petition No.327/2023 was further preferred on behalf of the petitioners, challenging the closure of right of cross-examination by the learned MM. Both the Criminal Revision Petitions were dismissed vide separate orders dated 23.08.2023 by the learned ASJ. Also, a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- was imposed in Criminal Revision Petition No.327/2023, whereby the right of cross-examination was closed by the learned MM.

¶28

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the right of clubbing of all the cases had an impact on the conduct of the complaint cases which arise out of the same transaction, the order for closure of right of cross-examination should not have been passed by learned MM till disposal of Revision Petition No.211/2023, which was preferred against order dated 11.01.2023 dismissing the application for clubbing of cases. It is further submitted that separate order upholding the closure of right of crossexamination with cost of Rs.1,00,000/- is also unjustified.

¶29

6. On the other hand, petitions have been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the respondent and the contention that the cases arise out of the same transaction, is disputed. It is pointed out that an earlier CRL.M.C.7602/2022 preferred by the petitioner was withdrawn and the present petitions are not maintainable.

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

CRL.M.C. 654/2024 & etc.

¶32

Page 3 of 5

¶33

Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 1.02.2024 16:04:22

¶34

7. On the face of record, CRL.M.C.7602/2022 earlier preferred by the petitioner does not bar the present petitions, since the aforesaid CRL.M.C. had been withdrawn by the petitioners with liberty to file afresh and it was submitted that there was an error in drafting the petition as an order dismissing the application under Sections 220 & 223 of Cr.P.C. had not been challenged in the said petition.

¶35

8. It appears that learned MM closed the right of cross-examination in view of observations in order dated 20.01.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge in Revision Petition No.13/2022, whereby the crossexamination of the complainant was directed to be conducted in the first single opportunity granted by the concerned learned Trial Court without seeking adjournment on any ground whatsoever including the ground that a new counsel is engaged or any other ground of transfer of any matter, etc. to the same Court.

¶36

However, it may be observed that situation arising out of an application preferred on behalf of the petitioner for clubbing of the aforesaid ten complaint cases was not contemplated while passing order dated 20.01.2022 in Revision Petition No.13/2022.

¶37

Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the right of cross-examination being an important right to defend the proceedings should not be curtailed. In the interest of justice, petitioner is accorded one more opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses, irrespective of the proceedings preferred by the petitioner for clubbing of cases. The cross-examination shall be conducted on the date already fixed before the learned Trial Court i.e. 13.03.2024 until and unless the same is deferred by the learned MM for any specific reasons to be recorded.

¶38

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 1.02.2024 16:04:22

¶39

CRL.M.C. 654/2024 & etc.

¶40

Page 4 of 5

¶41

Petitions are accordingly allowed, subject to payment of earlier cost of Rs.10,000/- and further composite cost of Rs.50,000/-. The cost of Rs.1,00,000/- imposed vide order dated 23.08.2023 by the learned Revisional Court is set aside. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶42

A copy of this judgment be forwarded to the learned Trial Court for information and compliance.

¶43

A copy of this judgment be placed in connected petitions.

¶44

(ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA) JUDGE

¶45

FEBRUARY 15, 2024 /v

¶46

Signature Not Verified

¶47

CRL.M.C. 654/2024 & etc.

¶48

Page 5 of 5

¶49

Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 1.02.2024 16:04:22

M/S Samrat Heavens Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Satinder Kumar Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Samrat Heavens Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Satinder Kumar Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harkesh Kumar Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Mohammad Yasin Malik Vs Union of India & Ors.

Vijay Gupta and Ors. Vs State and Anr.

Khalil Ahmed Vs State NCT of Delhi

Sarfaraz Alam & Ors. Vs State Govt.O Fnct of Delhi and Anr.

Devender Kumar Rana Vs the State Govt.of NCT of Delhi