KISHOR KANTILAL JAIN Vs. SACHIN KANTILAL JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M.S. Kulkarni, the learned Counsel for the applicant. Heard Mr. B.A. Dhengle, the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1. Heard Mr. GR. Ingole, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent No. 2. With the assistance of the learned Counsel for the parties, I have gone through the entire evidence adduced before the trial court, and the relevant parts of the impugned judgments.

(2.) In the course of arguments, Mr. Kulkarni, the learned Counsel for the applicant, submitted that, he be permitted to raise an additional ground of challenge in support of the Revision Application. He submitted that, the learned Magistrate who recorded the conviction, had not recorded any evidence in the case, and that, he merely acted on the evidence recorded by his predecessor. According to Mr. Kulkarni, this was not permissible in view of the provisions of Section 326(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [For short, "the Code"]. He has also placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court of India, in the case of Nitinbhai Saevatilal Shah & another v. Manubhai Manjibhai Panchal & another, 2011 4 BCR(Cri) 9], in support of his contentions.

(3.) Since this is a revision, any law point in support of contentions of a party can be raised. Accordingly, the applicant is permitted to raise a ground as Ground No. III-A. The same is taken on record.