VASANTHA AMIN Vs. SHEKARA N H

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has called in question the correctness and legality of the order passed by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Puttur, in C.C.No.430/2010 dated 25.06.2018, whereby the application filed by the respondent herein (hereinafter referred to as 'complainant') under Sections 311 and 91 of Cr.P.C, came to be allowed and the case was reopened for the purpose of further examination of PW.1.

(2.) The essential facts necessary for disposal of this petition are that respondent/complainant initiated proceedings against the petitioner/accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, for dishonour of the cheque for a value of '6 Lakhs. After conclusion of the trial and after hearing the parties, the matter was set down for judgment. At that stage, the trial Court having found that one of the document executed between the parties namely, a sale agreement dated 012006, was necessary for the fair decision in the case, suo motu directed the complainant to take steps to mark the said document.

(3.) The said order was challenged by the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.1966/2015 on the ground that the document in question was insufficiently stamped and therefore, the same could not be received in evidence. This Court, by order dated 26.08.2015, in Crl.P.No.1966/2015 allowed the criminal petition and the orders passed by the trial Court dated 102015 and 24.02015 were set aside and the trial Court was directed to consider the matter afresh after giving its audience to both the parties. Accordingly, by the impugned order, the trial Court considered the proposed document namely, the sale agreement dated 02.12.2006 and having come to conclusion that the possession of the subject property was not delivered to the vendee, the stamp duty paid thereon was sufficient and hence, permitted the complainant to re-examine himself and take steps to produce the said agreement in evidence.