RAJENDER VERMA Vs. ASHOK MALIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. assailing the order dated 26th October, 2010 of Metropolitan Magistrate whereby application of the Petitioner under Section 91 read with Section 349 Cr.P.C. was dismissed.

(2.) THE Petitioner is facing prosecution in the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act(in the short the NI Act) filed against him by the Respondent Ashok Malik. In the said complaint, the Respondent had examined himself as CW-1 in support of his complaint. THE complainant evidence having been closed, the statement of the petitioner had also been recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the case was at the stage of defence evidence of the petitioner. An application under Section 91 read with Section 349 Cr.P.C. for summoning some documents and for calling upon the respondent/Complainant to answer some queries.

(3.) THE record that was sought to be summoned from the Complainant under Section 91 Cr. P.C. consisted of copy of identity card issued by his department, copies of income tax returns, copy of the sale deed/power of attorney, agreement to sell the properties purchased by the Complainant through the petitioner/accused, copy of bank transaction loan if any relating to Rs. Nine lacs and copies of letters through which the Complainant might have informed his department about the purchase of the properties. THEre was no dispute with regard to the cheques in question issued by the petitioner to the Complainant/Respondent. In fact the petitioner had also filed a civil suit seeking declaration and cancellation of those cheques and said case is pending in the Court of Addl. District Judge. In the said civil suit an application of interrogatories under Order 11 Rule 2 CPC was filed by the petitioner, wherein a plea was taken by him that the Respondent/Complainant along with three persons threatened him and took two cheques of Rs.7 lacs and 2 lakhs respectively. He alleged that he issued the said two cheques to save himself from threats to his life given by the respondent/complainant and to save marriage of his son. He alleged that in the written statement, in the civil suit a plea was taken by the Respondent/Complainant that he had purchased some property through him and he (petitioner) had signed a sale deed as a witness and that he had lured him to make investment with him and so he gave him Rs. 9 lacs in cash and further that since the deal could not be finalized, the petitioner returned the said amount of Rs. 9 lacs by way to aforesaid two cheques. In the said civil suit also the petitioner through interrogatories sought information as regards all the documents which are sought to be produced by way of instant application under Section 91 Cr. P.C.