A.K. PAINTS Vs. BALAJI DISTRIBUTORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed for quashing of the Order dtd. 24/5/2019 (Annexure P-l) passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Faridabad in a complaint case No.3197 of 2017 dtd. 4/7/2017(Annexure P-2) under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 315 Cr.P.C. was dismissed; as well as the Order dtd. 3/5/2019(Annexure P-4), whereby the oral evidence of the petitioner was closed by Order, and further; for allowing the above said application.

(2.) Present petition has arisen from trial under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, in which the evidence of the complainant already stood completed and the evidence of the accused/defence is to be lead; but which is lingering on, which led the trial Court to pass the Order impugned in the present petition.

(3.) While arguing the case, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the Trial Court has wrongly observed that the application under Sec. 315 Cr.P.C has been moved by the petitioner for the purpose of delaying the trial. It is submitted that the evidence of the complainant was completed on 6/2/2019, thereafter, only three dates have been fixed for defence evidence and even on these three dates the petitioner could not complete his evidence due to the reasons beyond his control. But vide impugned Order dtd. 3/5/2019, the oral evidence of the petitioner/accused has been closed and thereafter, the application moved by the petitioner under Sec. 315 Cr.P.C has been dismissed vide Order dtd. 24/5/2019. Now the case has been fixed for documentary evidence only. It is submitted by the counsel that this would deny a fair opportunity to the petitioner to defend himself against the charge.