MAHESH SHARMA Vs. DINESH BHARDWAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mahesh Sharma petitioner filed complaint under Sec. 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the respondent which is pending trial before Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad. During the pendency of that complaint, he moved an application for permission to examine Rajesh Bansal son of Rameshwar Dayal as witness to prove that he has sold a plot to him for Rs. 10 lacs, which was dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the aforesaid witness was sought to be examined to meet the objection raised by the respondent that the petitioner did not have capacity to advance loan of Rs. 10 lacs for which he issued cheques. The evidence sought to be produced is material evidence but the trial Court committed grave error while commenting on the merits of the evidence sought to be produced and declining the permission to produce the witness.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent has argued that the application was moved by petitioner only to fill up the lacuna which cannot be allowed. He has further argued that the petition under Sec. 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') against the order declining the permission to lead additional evidence, is not maintainable and has relied on the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in case of Uppal Credit and Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ashwani Kumar 2016(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 684.