SUNIL AND OTHERS Vs. LAXMAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of both sides the matter is heard finally.

(2.) The complainant from a case instituted under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has approached this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, impugning the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Aurangabad on 19/6/2017 thereby rejecting his application (Exh.63) whereby he had requested to recall a witness, his Accountant Sunil Pralhad Kharat to prove a statement of account.

(3.) The learned Advocate for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner examined his accountant Sunil Pralhad Kharat to prove the account maintained with him in the name of the respondent accused, to prove that the disputed cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt. The statement of accountant was also tendered during examination in chief of the witness. However, it transpired that it did not bear his signature as a person who has prepared that statement as an extract of the accounts book. After the lapse was realised application (Exh.63) was moved and a request was made to allow the petitioner complainant to lead additional evidence of the accountant to prove the statement of the accountant with his signature. Even an additional statement of the accountant certified under his signature was also sought to be produced and still the learned Magistrate took a hyper technical view and rejected the request.