I have come across a case (S.138) which has taken quite an unpredicatble stand: the facts of case are:
1. Case is filed on behalf of properitorship firm under a simple authority letter to its employee.
2. This employee submitted his affidavit as 'Complainant Affidavit". His examination in chief over.
3. After few dates: another employee submits his affidavit, almost same with some material improvement again stating as "Complainant affidavit". His examination in chief over. He attaches an SPA also. SPA not notarised.
4. No permission, no application for substitution taken from court. It is just stated in the second affidavit that the first employee resigned from the firm.
5. This second person name is not there in the list of witness also.
It looked to me that no one noticed this substitution, everyone took it for granted.
There are around 5-6 (nothing of importance) dates after this substitution, before it was brought to my notice. The next date was fixed for complainant cross examination. I advised first to file an application u/s 256 for dismissal on account of absence of complainant. The complainant side took date for filing the reply. Can anything better be done to get the case quashed at the earliest. Please give your views.
