SATYENDRA PRADHAN Vs. AKSHAT AGRAWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Petition has been filed under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. against the order dtd. 16/12/2022 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Saraipali, District Mahasamund upholding the order dtd. 17/10/2022 passed by the JMFC, Saraipali in Criminal Complaint Case No.528/2022 whereby, the application filed by the Respondent/Complainant to adduce the witness, which is not named in the list of witnesses, has been allowed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the Respondent/Complainant has filed a complaint under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act with an averment that he was running a medical shop in the hospital of the Petitioner named as Arpita Hospial and later on, the same was closed and with negotiation, the Petitioner has handed over a cheque of Rs.14,51,000.00 to the Complainant which was dishonoured, therefore, a complaint has been filed. After registering the case, notice was issued to the Petitioner and the Complainant was examined. The Complainant has cited only 3 witnesses including himself and has moved an application on 24/10/2018 for examining his father in the mid trial, which has been allowed by the order impugned and affirmed by the revisional Court. Hence this Petition.

(3.) Shri Sahu submits that the order impugned is bad in law and not sustainable as in the complaint, there is no mention regarding the role played by the proposed witness i.e. the father of the Complainant namely Sunil Agrawal, who has also not been mentioned in the list of witnesses, therefore, he prays to quash the impugned order and allow the Petition.