S.M.D. MOHAMED ABDUL KHADER Vs. MUNISWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.7611 of 2019 in S.T.C.No.8 of 2018 dtd. 23/11/2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ramanathapuram, thereby dismissed the petition filed under Sec. 243 of Cr.P.C to issue witness summons to the witnesses enumerated in the list of witnesses.

(2.) The petitioner is an accused and the respondent is the complainant. The respondent lodged a complaint for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that the petitioner had borrowed a sum of Rs.8,00,000.00 as a hand loan on 21/8/2016. In order to repay the same, the petitioner issued cheque for a sum of Rs.8,00,000.00 and the same was presented for collection. However, it was dishonoured for the reason that 'account closed'. After causing legal notice as contemplated under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the petitioner filed the complaint and the same has been taken on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ramanathapuram. After completion of the evidence of the complainant, the petitioner made a statement under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C and specifically stated that the petitioner has evidence on his side. However, the Court below directed the petitioner to file appropriate petition to issue summons to the list of the witnesses. Accordingly, the petitioner filed a petition in Cr.M.P.No.7611 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ramanathapuram under Sec. 243 of Cr.P.C along with the following list of witnesses, which was dismissed by the trial Court:-

(3.) The respondent filed a counter-affidavit and revealed that the list of witnesses side is the Auditor to bring the documents and records relating to the income and asset of the accused and his family members and depose about the financial status of the accused and his family members. He is no way connected with the income of the complainant. Further, the second witness is the defacto complainant and there is absolutely no provision to examine the defacto complainant on the side of the defence side. The District Collector and Tahsildar are not at all required to be examined since the documents which are relied upon by the petitioner are private documents. Therefore, the petition has been filed only to drag on the proceedings and nothing else.