RANJEET SINGH Vs. SHYAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner (accused) has sought the indulgence of this Court by moving the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash and set -aside the order dated 23.5.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmour District at Nahan in Criminal Revision No. l -N/10 of 2008 whereby the order refusing to recall the complainant for his re -examination on an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure moved by the accused -Petitioner stands affirmed.

(2.) THE factual matrix of this matter can be summoned up thus: The Respondent herein had filed a complaint against the Petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He led his evidence. He and his witnesses were subjected to detailed cross -examination by the accused -Petitioner. Even the statement of the Petitioner under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded. No defense evidence was led by him. Thereafter, the case was fixed for final arguments on 21.12.2005 but the arguments could not be heard and the case lingered on one pretext or the other. However, final arguments were heard and concluded on 3.4.2006. The case was listed for orders on 26.4.2006 but the parties sought time to advance further arguments. The arguments were reheard and an application was moved on 29 -11 -2006 by the Petitioner, under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to recall and reexamine the complainant Ranjit Singh because some relevant facts with regard to the case recently came to his notice which were required to be put on record by cross -examining him. It was also contended that the Respondent had filed many false cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against many other persons, therefore, re -examination of the complainant Respondent was essential for the just decision of the case.

(3.) AFTER hearing the parties, learned trial Court dismissed the aforesaid application precisely on the grounds that the accused Petitioner was given full opportunity to cross -examine the complainant and his witnesses but at the fag end of the trial, he cannot be allowed to fill in the lacunae if any.