Accused in a cheque dishonour case sought to reopen and recall P.W.1 to obtain documents; his earlier summoning application had been dismissed by the trial court and confirmed by the High Court in revision. The court held the dismissal was correct and dismissed the petitions.
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.
Crl.O.P.Nos.5334 and 5348 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.06.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN
Crl.O.P.Nos.5334 and 5348 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3878 and 3905 of 2024
R.Senthilvel
.... Petitioner in both Crl.O.Ps.
Versus
Anu Akshya Auto Finance, Rep. by its Managing Partner, T.Chidambarasamy No.35-A, Sakthi Nagar, Tharapuram Road, Kangayam, Kangayam Taluk, Tirupur District. .... Respondent in both Crl.O.Ps.
Prayer: These Criminal Original Petitions are filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the order dated 11.01.2024 made in Crl.M.P.No.7088 and 7089 of 2023, respectively in S.T.C.No.174 of 2020 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Kangayam.
-1-
Crl.O.P.Nos.5334 and 5348 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Angamuthu
For Respondent : Mr.M.Vignesh
ORDER
The petitioner herein, is the accused in a complaint under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
has filed an application to reopen and recall P.W.1. The reason for such application is that during the cross examination of P.W.1, certain question being asked about the statement of accounts, income tax return and other documents with the witnesses admitted that it is available in the business premises namely, Anu Akshya Auto Finance. Therefore, the said application is filed to reopen and recall. However, the trial Court has dismissed the application stating that this petitioner, based on the response elucidated during the cross examination, filed an application under Section 254(2) Cr.P.C. to summon those documents, and that application is dismissed on
-2-
Crl.O.P.Nos.5334 and 5348 of 2024
17.03.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.7511 of 2022. Against this order, the accused filed Crl.R.C.No.1868 and Crl.M.P.No.17483 of 2023 and the same was dismissed on 08.11.2023. Therefore, while his claim to summon documents has already been dismissed by the trial Court and the same is confirmed by the High Court in the Revision, under the guise of reopen and recall P.W.1, the present petition is filed.
12.06.2024
asi
To
The Judicial Magistrate, Kangayam.
-3-
Crl.O.P.Nos.5334 and 5348 of 2024
DR.G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
asi
Crl.O.P.Nos.5334 and 5348 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3878 and 3905 of 2024
12.06.2024
-4-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court's dismissal of the application to reopen and recall P.W.1 in a Section 138 NI Act trial should be interfered with under Section 482 Cr.P.C., when a prior summons application wa
3 provisions across 2 enactments
R.Senthilvel
Anu Akshya Auto Finance, Rep. by its Managing Partner, T.Chidambarasamy
G. Jayachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
