KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. RAKESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the order of the Appellate Court dtd. 9/4/2019 whereby his application under Sec. 311 of the Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the application was in fact under Sec. 391 of the Cr.P.C. and there was an inadvertent error which mentioned the application as under Sec. 311 of the Cr.P.C. He further contends that the application was for producing handwriting and finger print expert to examine the receipts issued by the petitioner to the complainant which had been produced by the complainant in the trial Court. The receipts were not part of the legal notice and the complaint but the same were produced by the complainant in his cross-examination and, therefore, it would be in the interest of justice if the petitioner is granted an opportunity to lead additional evidence by examining handwriting expert. He has also cited the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Rambhau and another v. State of Maharashtra, (2001) 4 SCC 759, and the judgments of the Coordinate Benches of this Court in CRM-M-6246 of 2018 titled as Paramjit Singh @ Pammi v. State of Punjab and Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab, 2018 (2) RCR (Criminal) 21 in support of his arguments.

(3.) Heard.