ANIL CHAUHAN Vs. ONAM EDUCATION SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has called in question the order dated 21.06.2014 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1. Mandi, in Criminal Case No. 27 -3 of 2010/13 whereby the application under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short 'the Code') preferred by the respondent, has been allowed.

(2.) SHORN of all necessary facts, the respondent preferred a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on account of dishonour of cheque of sum of Rs. 24 lacs which according to the complainant -respondent had been advanced to the petitioner for construction of school building.

(3.) THIS application was contested by the petitioner herein by claiming that the witness, who appeared on behalf of the complainant, was not authorized to file the complaint and who in his cross -examination admitted that he had not filed any authority letter and thereby had failed to prove his authorization. It was further averred that confronted with such situation, the complainant had now prepared and manipulated all the alleged documents after his cross -examination and the application was belated as having been filed after a lapse of eight months which gives rise to the presumption that all these documents have been manipulated and prepared after cross -examination of the witness.