PRADEEP SHARMA Vs. ARUN KUMAR PATEL @ SAMEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sec. 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short BNSS') making prayer for quashing the order dtd. 3/12/2024 (Annexure P-5), passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Faridabad in complaint bearing NACT No. 961 of 2021, titled as Pradeep Sharma vs. Arun Kumar Patel @ Sameer, filed under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short N. I. Act), whereby an application filed by the petitioner/complainant under Sec. 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code') had been dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated, the relevant facts of the case are that the aforesaid complaint has been filed by the petitioner under Sec. 138 of the N. I. Act on the allegations that the petitioner had given a friendly loan of Rs.20,00,000.00 to the respondent. In order to discharge his liability, the respondent had issued two cheques for an amount of Rs.10,00,000.00 each on 3/2/2021 but on presentation of the same before the banker of the petitioner, the same were dishonoured with the remarks funds insufficient'. The respondent failed to pay the amount due against him even after receipt of legal notice from the petitioner, thereby compelling the petitioner to file the aforesaid complaint. Process has been issued against the petitioner and he is facing trial before the learned trial Court.

(3.) The petitioner had moved an application under Sec. 311 of the Code for summoning two persons namely Ashok Kumar and Ravinder Tewatia as witnesses on the grounds that during his cross-examination, it had surfaced that the aforesaid loan was advanced to the respondent in the presence of these persons. After hearing both the parties, the learned Magistrate had dismissed this application by observing that the names of proposed witnesses were not mentioned in the list of witnesses, despite the fact that the complainant was aware that the alleged loan was given to the respondent in their presence and also by observing that it was the afterthought of the complainant to bring the above mentioned persons in his evidence with the purpose of filling up the lacunas. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition.