V R SHANTA Vs. K N PUTTARAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two petitions are the outcome of the judgment of the lower appellate court, which had remanded the case to the trial court for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

(2.) THE trial court had convicted the accused in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 474 and 420 of the I.P.C. and an appeal preferred by the accused and the matter was remitted to the trial court. Thus, both the complainant and the accused are aggrieved by the order of remand in Crl.A. No. 676/2010 passed by the learned judge of the F.T.C. on 19.7.2011. The complainant has preferred Crl.R.P. No. 1012/2011 and the accused has preferred Crl.R.P. No. 1087/2011.

(3.) SHRI H.V.Manjunatha, learned counsel for the accused, on the other hand, submitted the lower appellate court has given several reasons for remanding the case to the trial court and one such reason is that, the agreement of sale dated 25.11.1998 has not been produced and marked in evidence, but the trial court had gone on to record a finding that the said agreement of sale is a forged one. Moreover, the lower appellate court has also noted that several documents which were referred to for comparison were also not marked in evidence and finally, the trial court did not formulate the point for determination as required, but proceeded to discuss the evidence. On these grounds, the lower appellate court remanded the case to the trial court.