BANSHI LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. This misc. petition under Sec. 482, Code Criminal Procedure has been filed against the order dated 23.11.2011 whereby the learned trial court dismissed the application under Sec. 311, Code Criminal Procedure and the revision has also been dismissed as not maintainable.

(2.) The contention of the present petitioner is that the proceedings are pending against the present petitioner for the offence under Sec. 138 of the Netotiable Instruments Act and he wants to produce Heera Lal as defence witness in whose presence cheque amount has been given to the complainant and the complainant has issued a receipt thereof, but his application was rejected and hence this petition.

(3.) A bare perusal of the impugned order goes to show that the present petitioner has stated that he had given the amount to Heera Lal and Heera Lal has given a receipt to the present petitioner. If the amount has been given to Heera Lal, this payment has nothing to do with the impugned cheque and the present petitioner has already been given chance to produce his defence witness but he did not avail that opportunity and the learned trial court has specifically stated that this witness has no relevancy with the present petition and hence the application has been disallowed. Here in the present petition, the petitioner has totally changed the stand and he had stated that the cheque amount was repaid to the complainant in the presence of Heera Lal and a receipt has been issued by the complainant. If receipt has been issued by the complainant, then there is no need to produce Heera Lal as witness and the receipt can be proved by the petitioner himself and should be put to the complainant in her crossexamination and hence the application under Sec. 311 was totally misconceived and which has been rightly rejected by the trial court, hence this petition is liable to be rejected.