Amendment in affidavit to complainant - in a ch return case

Yes it can be done, the court may keep both the affidavits on record and may allow the new affidavit, since no way accused is getting prejudiced with this. After the cognizance and issuance of the process the matter would have been different. At the best court will raise an objection that the date of filing the case within stipulated time may be over, but you can always argue that witness who filed the affidavit was not yet examined and it was a bonafide mistake.

when you file complaint you need to be correct in all particulars. see in a case by industrial development corpotion in maharashtra filed two complaints on  notices u/s sec 138, relying on a postal ack receipt card woth post offce seal of a particular date. Affidavit also filed by complainant as also by EOW wing of mumbai police commissioner. the caseswere filed in 2004 in metropolitan magistrates courts, the went to sessions as complainant/prosection wanted custody of accused, accused was in jail in 2006 and got bail from hgh court, got conditional bail , highcourt did not give opinion on merits of the case.

then bail is effective .

problem is why a sec 138 case take 10+ years, case was referred to me in 2012 , then after detailed legal research on factuality of facts and alication of all laws, even though there was EOW investigation relying on some documents but i suspected some where some foul play on facts, as the matter lingers long by several adjournments complainant or prosecuton getting without sensible reasons or no reasons, i issued legal noticeto postal authorities to confirm whaether acknowledgement cards filed as proof of delivery, the postal authorities informed  after their investigation at rlevant post officer, that the ack card zerox i attached from the complainants file in court, theacknowledgement card is doubtful and postal seals affixed does not belong to relevant post office in question, this reveal perjury of complainant before courts; besides prosecution after investigation also lied.

the complaints will be dismissed soon in a month or so. but it took unnecessary clear 10 years damaging reputation of accused, besides destrying his earning abilitiies as he cannot take up any productive jobs, as bail conditions made himappear before police or before courts concerned, a clear miscarriage of justice.

So it is clear that even if the 138 notice if sent by regular envelops what is the guarantee that the complaint really mailed the 138 notice by stiffing in the envelop and hence the envelops containg 138 notices can contain some other communications. so indeed 138/notice letters in envelopes too are dobtful and questinable;

coming back further, courier documents under sec 138 also will be doubtful; so only registered postalack is sensible maiing if mailed in registered inland letter covers which will carry all relevant particulars.

now  i sent perjury notice to complainant of sec.138 notice with severe ramification to visit upon Art .12 institution which perpetrated. so complainant essentially be very careful while filing genuine case under 138, else he runs the risk of court dismissing his case.

complainants cannot be casual in their approaches on sec 138 Notices under negotiable instrumens Act. please;

true erros can be corrected wiithin a reasonable time with the permission of court if genuineness of error is preceded by complainant's Affidavit of error, as no complainant can be trusted on face value is my view! sorry 

Following documents in cheque cases come from custody of the complainant and hence every possibility that they are doctored.

1) Postal ack card.

2) copy of the notice.

AS A RULE THE SAME CAN BE PROVED AS FORGED, FABRICATED AND ACCUSED CAN GET RELIEF VERY EASILY.

My suggestions to Supreme court/high courts on the issue of long pending sec 138 matters under negotiable instruments Act 1881.

Courts make it mandatory to all sec 138complainants on Inland Leter cards of Post offices, have to send register letter under aknoledgement due;

couriering such notices may fail the case as deliveries cannot be authenticated like by regular indian poatal services;

Post officer need to sell regular post office printed sec/138 Notices as per law and the blanks need to be filled and signed by real constituted atthoriries of complainants or complainant himself;

post offices can such inland letter cards for Rs.100, Rs.1000, and Rs.10,000. if complaint is on cheque less than 1 lac rs.100 valued inland letter card will suffice, similarly for 1 -10 lacs, Rs.1000/-, so too if for cheque values from 10 lacs - 50 lacs, Rs 10,000 letter cards for more than 50 lacs cheues a postal tax @ 1% per lac above of rs 50,lacs cheques; this will augment revenue to postal services  besides frivalous complaints will dwindle;

Similarly, the courts can levy in the same lines as court fees for filing criminal 138 complaints, that will augment court revenues, discourage frivalous complaints;

in case perjeries cout will sent the signatory of complaint, need to undergo one year civiljail in the first instance and second instance 3 years RI that will deter people from lying to courts; besides every such complainant need befined alternatively pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- first instance, second instance Rs.5 lacs as fine such fines will deter people making false statements as true before courts;

the back log of cases of 138 can be an amnesty by court to withdraw cases, if felt doubtful by complainants, with a minimum penalty of Rs.1000/- for cases less than a year; Rs.10,000 if under 2-5 ; if more than 5 years upto 10 years, Rs1lac and if more than 10 years 138 complaints pending in courts, a flat rate fine of Rs.5 lacs rupees penalty can be levied; this will deter senseless 138 cases and also augmet revenue to funds starved courts to meet additional improvements needed in court adminstration;

similarly the courts can imaginatively fine in all kinds of criminal cases;

if ppublic servants are involved infiling sec 138 cases, they also can be fined as stated above

in administration of justice, deterrance on false case filings will drastically cut down irrelevant and bad cases;

i may be wrong subject to fellow professionals ideas on deterance on lying and / or harassment cases! thanks adv dr g balakrishnan, bombay high court 

There is no provision in any law to amend the affadavit once filed.

If process is issued that good case for accused to get it dismissed on this point alone.

Dear Ashok,

Yes you can file additional affidavit with permission of the court but you cannot amend / change the filed affidavit.

Rajiv Bhasin

Advocate

Bhasin & Associates

bhasin.laws@yahoo.com

9811210505

sir

              can any one give any judgment for the above where an affidavit cannot be changed or amended once filed in the court in criminal cases

Dear,

Instead of relying upon earlier wrong affidavit. you should withdraw it with permission of the court stating the clear facts and file new affidavit as complainant evidence has not been done. You can do so. It is a practise civil as well as criminal case that one affidavit is filed, it cannot be changed or amended later

Rajiv Bhasin 

Advocate