SURENDRA BHIDASARA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition under Sec. 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused-petitioner against the order dtd. 4/11/2023 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge No.2, Hanumangarh in Cr. Revision No.88/2022 whereby the learned revisional court allowed the revision filed by the accusedrespondent No.2 and set aside the order dtd. 19/9/2019, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarh in Cr. Case No.214/2017, by which the learned trial court allowed the application under Sec. 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the petitioner filed a complaint under Sec. 138 of NI Act against the accused- respondent No.2. After completion of the evidence, when the matter was fixed for final hearing, at that time petitioner filed an application under Sec. 311 Cr.P.C. stating that due to oversight, the documents which were filed with the affidavit, could not be exhibited, therefore, the same may be exhibited. After hearing both the parties, the said application was allowed by the trial court i.e. Additional Chief Judicial Magistarte, Hanumangarh vide order dtd. 19/9/2019. Against the said order, a revision was preferred by the respondent No.2, which was allowed by the revisional court i.e. Additional Session Judge No.2, Hanumangarh vide impugned order dtd. 4/11/2023.

(3.) Counsel submits that the order passed by the revisional court is per se illegal and deserves to be quashed and set aside. The petitioner/complainant filed some documents along with his affidavit, which had already been on record, but due to oversight the same could not be exhibited before the trial Court. It is submitted that for a just decision of the case, it is very much essential to exhibit these documents. But, the learned revisional court failed to consider this aspect of the matter and by the impugned order, allowed the revision of the respondent No.2 and set aside the order passed by the trial court. The impugned order of the revisional court being per se illegal deserves to be quashed and set aside.