SHAKTI SINGH RATHORE Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 26.05.2008 so as the order dated 25.11.2009, this miscellaneous petition has been filed.

(2.) It is submitted that petitioner made an application for calling certain records as well as witness Gopi Kishan Chhaparwal, however, the said application was rejected by the trial Court and the revisions petition so preferred by the petitioner was also dismissed. Out of documents so summoned, one was regarding payment towards excise duty and other income tax returns of the non-petitioner-complainant. It is mentioned that marble can be sold only after paying excise duty, thus as to whether the sale transaction took place between the parties or not, aforesaid documents is relevant. The income tax returns were called to look into as to whether the amount of Cheque is shown to be outstanding towards petitioner or not. The Court below dismissed the application without applying its mind and thereby, rejected the prayer of the petitioner to call the non-petitioner's brother Shri Gopikishan Chhaparwal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the non-petitioner submits that so far as the prayer to call for the excise duty return is concerned, the non-petitioner is only trader in marble and not a manufacturer. The marble is excise duty paid by the manufacturer. In view of the aforesaid, the excise duty is not paid by the non-petitioner, thus no record exists. The aforesaid record has been summoned to delay matter only. So far as the income tax returns are concerned, it is stated that non-petitioner has already submitted his accounts, which have been marked as P-2, thus nothing more is required. Even if the income tax returns are yet required, it would be produced by the non-petitioner on the next date itself so that no further delay is caused. So far as Gopikishan Chhaparwal is concerned, it is submitted that he has been summoned without showing any reason, thus prayer of the non-petitioner is that the petition may be dismissed.