Appln u/s 91 in NA case u/s138 before CE permissible or not
Hanuman Gupta
(Querist) 05 December 2017
This query is : Resolved
Sir,
I have filed a complaint u/s 138 for bouncing of cheque , which was issued by accused towards the sale consideration amount, mentioned in registered Sale Deed.
The marking of documents are completed and case was posted for CE , and is pending.
In the meantime The counsel for accused has filed a petition u/s 91 seeking my 1)Income tax returns copy,
2)Capital Gain Account statement,
3) Bank A/c statement
4) Statement of transactions with accused.
and so many other irrelevant documents.
I am of the opinion that this is only a part of the delaying tactics and harassment to me , as I am appearing on each date and accused is not; inspite of availing BALE.
Kindly advise, is it mandatory to produce these documents or not.
Regards
Hanuman Gupta
P. Venu
(Expert) 05 December 2017
Let the court decide the matter at its discretion.
M V Gupta
(Expert) 05 December 2017
Contest the demand made by the Accused's advocate on the ground of irrelevancy.
N.K.Assumi
(Expert) 06 December 2017
As pointed out by expert M.V.Gupta, it all depends on the relevancy of the documents in issue, and if relevant to the facts in issue, you are bound to tender those documents and no other evidence can take the place of those documents.
Hanuman Gupta
(Querist) 07 December 2017
Sir,
First of all I am thankful to you for the opinion given by you, which is definitely useful for further action.
Still I am having certain points in my mind and will be thankful if cleared.
Whether before Cross Examination of Complaints, application u/s 91, in cheque bounce case of NI Act u/s 138 can be moved.
Whether the accused can ask for the
financial transactions, for a period
much before the MOU date and after the period of filing the Case, and issuance date of cheque and bouncing date.
Whether the accused can demand the personal information, like Capital Gain etc.
Regards
Hanuman Gupta
M V Gupta
(Expert) 23 June 2018
I happen to see the further queries posted by the querist to day. As held by the Madras HC in Karupathal VS Palanisami Gounder reported in 1990 MAD LW (crl) Page 305, the court can consider such application before the accused enters on his defense. Hence in your case if the cross examination mentioned by you is that of the complainant, the court may consider the issue and decide whether the documents are relevant to decide the issue in the case. The objections mentioned by you may be included in the objections to be filed in the court.
M V Gupta
(Expert) 23 June 2018
I happen to see the further queries posted by the querist to day. As held by the Madras HC in Karupathal VS Palanisami Gounder reported in 1990 MAD LW (crl) Page 305, the court can consider such application before the accused enters on his defense. Hence in your case if the cross examination mentioned by you is that of the complainant, the court may consider the issue and decide whether the documents are relevant to decide the issue in the case. The objections mentioned by you may be included in the objections to be filed in the court.
