ANIL OBEROI Vs. SAJAN KUMAR AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This common order shall dispose of two petitions under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) preferred by two petitioners against two orders, both dated 20.02.2017, rejecting two applications under Section 311, Cr.P.C seeking prayers to recall and re-examine the common Complainant, one Sajan Kumar Agarwal who had initiated Private Complaint Case No. 06/2015 and Private Complaint Case No. 10/2015 against Anil Oberoi and Subash Chaturvedi, the petitioners herein, respectively, as both the petitions raises identical issues.

(2.) Briefly the relevant facts are:-

(3.) At the hearing Mr. K.T Bhutia, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner would draw the attention of this Court to Exhibit 3 (Agreement), Exhibit 4 (letter dated 01.08.2014), and Exhibit 5 (cheque no. 134104) in Private Complaint Case No. 06/2015 and Exhibit 3 (Agreement), Exhibit 4 (letter dated 20.08.2014), and Exhibit 5 (cheque no. 238856) in Private Complaint Case No. 10/2015. Mr. K.T Bhutia, would submit that in Exhibit 4 of both the Private Complaints which are letters dated 01.04.2014 and 20.08.2014 alleged to have been signed by the two petitioners he represents in the present proceedings, the type set and the handwriting on the blank space for dates are identical which would clearly reflects that the said letters were in fact letters which were typed from one and the same computer/printer and the handwriting was also of one and the same person. Similarly, the cheques marked Exhibit 5 in both the cases for different amounts payable to the same entity by the petitioners are not only of the same date but in the same handwriting of one and the same person. It is submitted by Mr. K.T Bhutia that certain vital question pertaining to this was not put in cross-examination of the Complainant which would go to the root of the matter during the cross-examination of the Complainant by the learned Counsel Mr. Dinesh Agarwal and as such, it would highly prejudice the defence if the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C are not allowed. Mr. K.T Bhutia would also argue that certain relevant questions pertaining to Exhibit 3 in both Criminal Complaints i.e. Agreement dated 30.05.2014 between Anmol Enterpirses and Anil Oberoi (accused in Private Complaint Case No 06/2015) and Agreement dated 30.05.2014 between Anmol Enterprises and M/s S. Chaturvedi & Co. (S. Chaturvedi being accused in Private Complaint Case No. 10/2015) to show the falsity of the Private Complaints based on the terms of the said Agreements were not put to the complaint by the said learned counsel, Mr. Dinesh Agarwal, while cross-examining the Complainant.