K. SURYANARAYANA Vs. J. CHALAPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions are filed by the complainant under Section 482 of the Cr.PC, before the trial Court challenging the common order passed on applications filed under Sections 311 and 91 of Cr.PC wherein prayer was sought that the complainant wants to confront some crucial documents so as to prove his case and sought short date to further examine the witness to furnish some additional documents to be received from the Bank authorities and the documents such as statement of bank accounts and details of the account pertaining to the accused from 1.1.2009 to 31.12.2012 are very much necessary and have to be summoned from Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, Yenumulapally Branch, Andhra Pradesh and initially the Bank's name was called as ING Vysya Bank Limited and now said Bank is merged with Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited. The statement of account details are in custody of Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited and hence prayed the trial Court to pass order for summoning the Branch Manager and order to produce those two bank accounts. The grounds urged in the application is that on perusal of the complaint, account statement clearly reflects the details of the accounts of the accused and name is reflected bank account's holder. It is prima facie case of the complainant and therefore the trial Court ought to have permitted to prove his case by giving an opportunity.

(2.) Learned Counsel also filed application under Section 311 of Cr.PC for recalling of DW.1 for cross examination and in order to substantiate the claim of the complainant, further cross examination is necessary.

(3.) Those two applications are objected by the respondent/accused herein contending that witness DW. 1 has been cross examined long back and thereafter other witnesses were also examined and accused also led his evidence and he has been cross examined in length on different occasions. Instead of arguing the case, the application is filed at the belated stage and there cannot be any order.