ARUN KUMAR OJHA Vs. ASAF ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is facing trial for alleged commission of offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act in ICC No. 17 of 2005 in the Court of the SDJM, Keonjhar. It is submitted that he is staying at Calcutta and due to certain inadverent reason it was not possible for him to appear in Court and adduce defence evidence. Consequently the Court below closed the evidence, heard arguments but then as in absence of the petitioner Judgment could not be pronounced has kept the same in sealed cover.

(2.) Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that non-appearance of the petitioner in Court for adducing defence evidence was not intentional, but was due to certain inadvertent reasons over which he had no control and unless further opportunity is granted to him to adduce defence evidence great prejudice will be caused to him and there will be violation of natural justice.

(3.) The submissions of Mr. Mohapatra are strongly repudiated by Mr. Dhal, learned counsel appearing for opposite party No. 1 -complainant. According to him enough opportunity had been given to the petitioner to adduce defence evidence but he did not avail of the same. Therefore the Court below rightly closed the evidence, heard arguments and posted the case for Judgment. At that juncture the petitioner approached this Court in CRLMC No. 101 of 2006 with identical prayer as made in this case. In course of hearing of that case it was brought to the notice of this Court that though more than eight to nine adjournments had been taken by defence in the aforesaid complaint case, still it failed to adduce any defence evidence. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties this Court disposed of the CRLMC on 8-2-2006 with the following observations:-