DEV SARIN Vs. DCM FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) THE petitioner is an accused facing trial in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed by respondent No. 1. On respondent No. 1 concluding its evidence and statement of the petitioner being recorded under Section 281 Cr.P.C. the matter was posted for the first time for defence evidence on 16th January 2006. No evidence was, however, produced by the petitioner on that day and the matter was thus adjourned to 25th March 2006. On the adjourned date again there was no evidence from the side of petitioner and the case was thus ad- journed to 5th July 2006, making it clear that it would be last and final opportunity. The petitioner however again did not produce his defence evidence on 5th July 2007, which occasioned yet another adjournment. The matter was eventually posted for 26th September 2006 on payment of cost of Rs. 200/- with the condition that it would be last opportunity. On 26th September 2006 also no defence evidence was produced. At the request of the petitioner, the Court concerned waited till 12:15 PM to enable him to produce his defence evidence, but on the case being taken up after pass over as requested, the trial court found that neither any defence witness of the petitioner nor his counsel was present. The Court thus closed the defence evidence and posted the matter for final arguments on 21st November 2006.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for petitioner submits that on 26th September 2006, which was the last date for producing defence evidence, though the statement in examination-in-chief of the petitioner on affidavit was ready, the same could not be filed before the learned trial court, since the learned counsel for the petitioner got stuck up in Supreme Court and could not reach the trial court on time. Learned counsel for the respondent/company, on the other hand, contests the plea of the learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard by pointing out that if the evidence of the petitioner on affidavit would have actually been ready, the same could have very well been filed in the Court by the petitioner him-self even if his counsel was not available, being held up in Supreme Court as contended.