BALBIR SINGH Vs. KULWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in these petitions is for setting-aside the impugned order dtd. 17/9/2016 passed by the Lower Appellate Court vide which the application filed by the petitioner/accused under Ss. 391 and 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') praying for leading additional defence evidence and re-calling the respondent/complainant for cross-examination was dismissed in complaint No.1150 dtd. 25/7/2014 and complaint No.1351 dtd. 25/7/2014. For The impugned order passed in criminal complaint No.1150 of 2014 is challenged in CRM-M No.36367 of 2016 whereas the order passed in criminal complaint No.1351 of 2014 is challenged in CRM-M No.36489 of 2016.

(2.) Brief facts of the case as taken from criminal complaint No.1150 of 2014 are that the respondent/complainant - Balbir Singh filed a complaint under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short 'the NI Act') with the allegations that the complainant was known to him and as per an agreement to sell dtd. 23/8/2013, the accused agreed to sell 03 shops in village Kheri Gujran, District Patiala and received a sum of Rs.10.00 lacs in presence of marginal witnesses of the agreement to sell. It was agreed that the sale deed will be registered in favour of the complainant upto 30/10/2013. Later on, the complainant express his inability to get the sale deed executed and in the month of April, 2014 in presence of one Davinder Kumar, it was settled that the petitioner/accused will return the amount of Rs.13.50 lacs and he issued 02 cheques bearing No.579343 dtd. 16/4/2014 for a sum of Rs.6.50 lacs (subject-matter of complaint No.1150 of 2014) and No.579344 dtd. 20/5/2014 for a sum of Rs.7.00 lacs (subject-matter of complaint No.1351 of 2014). On presentation, both the cheques were dishonoured by the bank with the remarks 'payment stopped by the drawer's and funds insufficient'. After serving the legal notice, the respondent filed 02 complaint under Sec. 138 of the NI Act, in which the petitioner was summoned and after the respondent/complainant led his evidence by examining himself as CW1 For and producing on record the relevant documents and income-tax return, the case was fixed for recording the statement of the petitioner/accused under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., in which he made the following statement:-

(3.) The respondent/complainant contested the said application. The Lower Appellate Court vide similar order passed in both the appeals dtd. 17/9/2016, dismissed both the applications under Ss. 391 as well as 311 Cr.P.C. The operative part of the order reads as under:-