ORTHULA SATYA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is accused in C.C.No.454 of 2019 before the VII Special Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, for offence under Sec. 138 under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, had filed a Crl.M.P.No.615 of 2022 for recall of P.W.1. This application is said to have been filed on the ground that the original promissory note has not filed along with a complaint and therefore, it is necessary to cross examined the P.W.1 on this aspect.

(2.) The learned Magistrate after hearing both sides had recorded that P.W.1 had been cross examined by the counsel for the petitioner on two occasions i.e., 19/9/2019 and 19/11/2019 and the cross-examination drawn to about six pages. After recording this fact, the learned Magistrate also took a view that the promissory note had already been marked along with the evidence in chief of P.W.1 and as such nothing further survives for the further cross-examination.

(3.) This Court does not find any reasons to differ with the view of the learned Magistrate.