NAGESH Vs. MEDITRADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C for setting aside the order passed by the trial court in CC.No.4100/2020 on the application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 311 of Cr.P.C and under Sec. 91 of Cr.P.C and under Sec. 65 B of Evidence Act, vide order dtd. 21/9/2021.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for respondent No.2.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a retail pharmacy dealer said to have purchased the pharmaceuticals from the respondent who is said to be a wholesale dealer through his sales representatives. The further case of the petitioner is that he issued cheque for a security purpose prior to the supply of the goods. Subsequently, without the instructions the respondent filed a cheque and got dis-honoured and filed complaint under Sec. 138 of NI Act. The evidence of PW1 complainant was already over and prior to the examination of defense, the petitioner filed an application to call/summon the witness by name Surendar and Vishal Das who is the company representative of the respondent and it is contended that prior to the litigation there was a settlement between the company representative and the petitioner and that the company representative had agreed to receive some lesser amount and an audio was also recorded in this aspect. Therefore, the said witness is necessary for proving his case in respect of the amount payable by the petitioner. The learned counsel submits the Surendar and Vishal Das were employees of the respondent, therefore the address are with the respondent, hence it is necessary to summon the respondent No.2 to furnish the address of those witnesses for the purpose of summoning those witnesses. Learned counsel submits there was CD recording in respect of conversation made by the petitioner and the Surendar and Vishal Das who are the representative of respondent, therefore these documents are necessary for him to prove his defense. The application came to be dismissed, hence the petitioner is before this court.