A.UMAR Vs. VATHIYAR FIANCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner/petitioner/accused has preferred the present revision in Crl. R.C. No. 291 of 2005 against the order passed in C.M.P. No. 6500 of 2005 in C.C. No. 390 of 2000, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-VI, Coimbatore, dated 23.2.2006. The short facts of the case are as follows:

(2.) The complaint was taken on the file of Judicial Magistrate-VI, Coimbatore as C.C. No. 390 of 2000. During the case proceedings, the accused had filed a petition in C.M.P. No. 6500 of 2005 in C.C. No. 390 of 2000 under Section 91 of Cr.P.C., calling for income tax returns and the book of accounts of the respondent/complainant. It was submitted that as far as the offence under Negotiable Instruments Act is concerned, the accused should be allowed to rebut the presumptions arising out of the cheque issued, as contemplated under Section 118 of the Act and to prove the same by one of rebuttal, the above said documents are very essential to prove his case that there was no passing of consideration as to the transactions that took place in the year 1997, and that the alleged cheque was issued on 12.1.2000. In support of his contentions, he had marked a ruling 2002 DCR 231 of the High Court, wherein, the High Court had observed that the accused had got the right to prove his case and hence, may require the accounts in possession of the complainant and had allowed the revision.

(3.) The respondent/complainant in his counter had stated that the petition was filed only to delay the proceedings and that the case has been pending for more than five years. It was submitted that no such documents are available with this complainant as the original complainant, Rangasamy, who has given evidence in this case on 4.4.2002 has already demised and this complainant has got into the shoes as representative of the complainant firm. It was submitted that the present complainant was also examined on 4.10.2003.