HARMEHTAB SINGH RAREWALA Vs. GAURAV JAIN AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of above said seven petitions. Although, the seven cases are filed separately, however, the facts involved in these petitions are similar and identical. For the purpose of reference, the facts as mentioned in CRM-M-35947 of 2013 are taken by the Court.

(2.) Prayer in this petition is for challenging the order dated 19.10.2012 (Annexure P-5); passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana, in a complaint titled as Harmehtab Singh Vs. Gaurav Jain and others; filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, whereby the application dated 05.01.2011 (Annexure P-2) filed by the present petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C., for leading additional evidence for examining witnesses and production of the record was rejected.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, against the respondent No.2, in the year 2006. It was alleged in the complaint that accused No.1 was running business under the name and style of M/s Gaurav Jain and Company at Ahmedgarh. The complainant is an agriculturist and he owns land at Rara Sahib. The accused had business dealing with the complainant. The accused took a loan amounting to Rs.63,00,000/- on 03.02.2006 from the complainant and promised to return the same up to 01.05.2006. It was further alleged that in order to discharge his legal liability to repay the said loan amount of Rs.63,00,000/-, respondent No.1 had issued seven cheques bearing No. 483273, 483274, 483275, 483276, 483277, 483278 and 483279 of Rs.9,00,000/-, all drawn on Oriental Bank of Commerce, Branch Ahmedgarh, from account No.632 of the firm M/s Gaurav Jain and Company, Ahmedgarh. When cheque No. 483273 dated 01.05.2006 amounting to Rs.9,00,000/- was presented to the banker of respondent No.1, then the same was dishonoured with the remarks "Exceeds Arrangement". After the cheque issued by respondent No.1 was dishonoured, then the petitioner served a legal notice dated 10.06.2006 upon respondents; as required under the mandatory provisions of law. However, despite that, the payment was not made; leading to filing of the complaint against the respondents. During his evidence, the complainant examined himself as a witness besides the other witnesses. However, before completion of his evidence, the petitioner moved an application dated 05.01.2011 under Section 311 Cr.P.C.. It was averred in the application that qua the above said loan, the respondents had executed an agreement dated 03.02.2006; on a stamp paper which was sold by stamp vendor-Sh. Irshad Ali Khan, undertaking the repayment of the loan to the petitioner. The said agreement is signed by one Kulwinder Singh as witness. Hence, it was prayed that the petitioner be permitted to tender in evidence, the said agreement and further to examine the above said two witnesses, to prove that the respondent had issued cheques in discharge of his legally enforceable liability.