Dismissed

Khedwal Brothers v. Brij Mohan Agrawal S/O Shri Ramphool Agrawal

Rajasthan HC7 Feb 2025CRLMP/24/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused sought re-examination of himself and summoning of a handwriting expert concerning a cheque-book discovered after the trial court dismissed his application. The High Court found no error in the trial court's dismissal, noting the case was pending since 2016 and at final arguments since 2021, and dismissed the petition.

What the court decided

AI extract

Khedwal Brothers Vs Brij Mohan Agrawal S/O Shri Ramphool… — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:5521]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 24/2025

¶4

Khedwal Brothers, Through Proprietor Shankar Lal Sharma, Address- Shop No. B-9, New Colony, Paanchbatti, Jaipur (Raj).

¶5

Shankar Lal Sharma, Proprietor Khedwal Brothers AddressThrough A.k. Treders, Shop No. 416, Indira Bazar, Jaipur (Raj).

¶6

----Accused-Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

Brij Mohan Agrawal S/o Shri Ramphool Agrawal, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Ward No. 16, Bahetiyon Ka Mohalla, Chaksu, District Jaipur.

¶9

----Complainant-Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.K. Pandit, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishiraj Singh Rathore, P.P.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order

¶12

07/02/2025 :

¶13

Instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred on behalf of the accusedpetitioners against the impugned order dated 06.11.2024 passed by the Court of ld. Additional Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate, No.19, Chaksu, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, in Criminal Case No.606/2016, whereby the application under Section 315 & 311 of Cr.P.C. filed by petitioner for reexamination himself as evidence & summoning the hand-writing expert as witness, was dismissed.

¶14

Submissions of learned counsel appearing for the accusedpetitioner are that while he was looking to his old documents, he found the cheque-book of cheques bearing Nos.502271 to 502370, wherein it has also been mentioned that to whom the cheque in question has been issued. Therefore, the aforesaid cheque book is essential to be exhibited before ld. Trial Court & the petitioner/accused & hand-writing expert may be examined in respect of said cheque book.

(2 of 2)

[2025:RJ-JP:5521]

[CRLMP-24/2025]

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the submissions made herein-above.

¶19

Heard. Perused.

¶20

Perusal of the impugned order dt.06.11.2024 reveals that the case before ld. Trial Court is pending since, 2016. Prior to application u/s.315 & 311 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner had also filed an application for summoning the witness, namely Dinesh Sethi in respect of F.S.L. report & same was dismissed by ld. Trial Court on 01.04.2017. It is also clear that the case before ld. Trial Court has been pending for final arguments since 04.09.2021.

¶21

Looking to the facts & circumstances of the present case & considering the submissions made at bar, in my considered opinion, the ld. Trial Court has not committed any error & has rightly dismissed the application vide order dt.06.11.2024. No interference is called for.

¶22

Consequently, the present petition is dismissed.

¶23

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

¶24

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J

¶25

Ashok-SHUBHAM/124s

Khedwal Brothers v. Brij Mohan Agrawal S/O Shri Ramphool Agrawal

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Khedwal Brothers v. Brij Mohan Agrawal S/O Shri Ramphool Agrawal

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhool Chand S/O Shri Shankar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Lalita Devi W/O Shri Heeranand Vs Secretary

Jarnel Singh S/O Shri Variyam Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Tarsem Kumar S/O Shri Maruram, Vs State of Rajasthan

Anirudh Vyas S/O Late Shri Harish Vyas, Vs State of Rajasthan

Lalit Kumar S/O Shri Bainiram, Vs State of Rajasthan