N.i act
AJAYA KUMAR DASH
(Querist) 28 December 2011
This query is : Resolved
Respected Experts,
I am a complainant and filed a case ICC case under sec 138 of N.I Act in the year 2007 and during continuation of the examination of the accused as DW1,the accused filed a petition by enclosing a list of 11 nos of witnesses list ( fabricated list furnished by the accused and address of the witness are in other state of India) and made a prayer before the learned trial court to issue summons to the witnesses for their examination as defense witness as they are material witnesses for proper adjudication of the case and placed the decision in case of Godrej Pacific Tech Ltd Vs Computer Joint India Ltd and decession in P.Chhaganlal Gaga Vs.M.Sanjay Shaw before the trial court.
On perusal of the case record the learned JMFC passed an oder that none of the names of the witnesses cited in the list provided by the accused finds place in the evidence of the witnessess nor in the examiation-in the of the accused DW1, So this courts feels that by allowing this pettion the case will be lingered and also what specific role is played by each of the witnessess, has not been stated by the accused and also earlier Hon'ble High Court also given specific direction not to give unnecessary adjournments in the above said case , Hence the petition to recall the material witnessess is rejected.
Thereafter accused challenge the said order of JMFC and filed Criminal Misc.Petitition (CRL MC ) under sec 482 taking plea that the although JMFC has mentioned the two decisions placed by the accused but has not made any discussion as to whether the said decisions were applicable to the case or not and also with a prayer to quash the order and direct the JMFC to issue summons to the witnesses named in the petition in the interest of a fair trial. The High court also admit and granted stay in the Misc case arising out of above filed CRL MC and the matter is posted to up to 1st week Jan’2012 .
Kindly suggest me the points to be raised in the high court regarding vacate of stay and counter to above two decision placed by the accused.
Nadeem Qureshi
(Expert) 28 December 2011
Dear Ajy Kumar Dash
search other relevant SC judgement in you favour & point out the matter for vacated the stay or file petition before SC.
feel free to call
DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g
(Expert) 28 December 2011
Calling any witness the is right of defense and you have right to cross them and demolish there testimony.
Still you are opposing hence adverse inference against you is normally taken.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 28 December 2011
"Kindly suggest me the points to be raised in the high court regarding vacate of stay and counter to above two decision placed by the accused."????
DON'T you have lawyer engaged in the case.This is a plate form of limited scope.So much argument can not be formulated here.
AJAYA KUMAR DASH
(Querist) 31 December 2011
Respected Prabhakar Sir,
I have not engaed any advocate to look after the case in High Court. I am sincerely thankful to you for your reply regarding exhibit of forged and fake document by the accused in JMFC court in the case. Earlier you have given following suggestion :
As the document was filed by the party after your chief and cross was over an endorsement of denial by you or your lawyer then and there was required,now it should be pleaded that the accused party did not presented it to you or to your advocate for marking admission or denial and the document has been by slip wrongly exhibited,therefore the same may kindly be withdrawn and applicant be given opportunity to mark the same by his endorsement as " not admitted".
Accordingly I have filed the petition in lower court and the date was posted to 12.01.12 for hearing of the same petition and after perusal of the case record the
learned JMFC passed an oder that none of the names of the witnesses cited in the list provided by the accused finds place in the evidence of the witnessess nor in the examiation-in the of the accused DW1, So this courts feels that by allowing this 11 nos witnssess pettion the case will be lingered and also what specific role is played by each of the witnessess, has not been stated by the accused and also earlier Hon'ble High Court also given specific direction not to give unnecessary adjournments in the above said case , Hence the petition to recall the material witnessess is rejected.
But in the mean time accused challenge the said order of JMFC and filed Criminal Misc.Petitition (CRL MC ) under sec 482 taking plea that the although JMFC has mentioned the two decisions placed by the accused Godrej Pacific Tech Ltd Vs Computer Joint India Ltd and P.Chhaganlal Gaga Vs.M.Sanjay Shaw but has not made any discussion as to whether the said decisions were applicable to the case or not and also with a prayer to quash the order and direct the JMFC to issue summons to the witnesses named in the petition in the interest of a fair trial.
The High court also admit and granted stay in the Misc case arising out of above filed CRL MC and the matter is posted to up to 1st week Jan’2012.
Kindly suggest me how I will counter the same in high court .
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 02 January 2012
It is better to engage a lawyer to guide you through in such scenerio.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 02 January 2012
DEFENCE MUST BE ALLOWED ANY WITNESS, AT ANY POINT OF TIME.
FILLING THE LACUNA, AND CALLING WITNESSES NOT LISTED IN COMPLAINT CAN BE REJECTED,
BUT DEFENSE MUST BE GIVEN ALL OPPORTUNITIES TO DEFEND HIS CASE.
