Help cheque bounce

Technically the second affidavit is not maintainable,however the court will say you cover it in cross.

But if the amount of cheque is more than this is the opportunity to weaken the case at this point alone.

Apply for dismissal of second affidavit and seek order of the court on this matter first. Go in revison if the matter goes against.

Thank you sir, actually suddenly the first employee stopped coming and this second employee started coming and he filed the affidavit along wih bank papers, court did not notice as new judge was present. when later i objected he filed the application for change of cause title in his favor, which was permitted, but till today his name is not there in the witness list or no application for witness. i checked the record he has mentioned and re numbered the cheque,  notice exhibit numbers as originally submitted by earlier employee complainant. First employee does not come for cross.

Was the application under S.311 filed for bringing in new witness ? As rightly stated the second affidavit seems inadmissible.

Pl advise as the next date for cross is fixed on 28/5. Shud i cross or deny  to cross.

Please contact your advocate for proper action is good advice.

Sir, my advocate is saying we will do cross on him, but i feel we are wrong if we cross him, because the new person filed the affidavit without any permission and his name  not in the witness list. this new person just filed the affidavit after one year of charge framed. Pl give some citations or advise steps so that i can ask my advocate.

It is apparent that in your case intial recording of evidence and charge frame stage is over. See from the record if this person has filed the evidence after charges are framed..

May be below extract of the Hon Punjab & Haryana High Court can help

……on the question of framing the charge, it is expressly recorded that the prosecution had closed its "pre-charge'' evidence. This is tantamount to a statement under Sub-section (2) of Section 252 of the Criminal Procedure Code that excepting the witnesses named in the list with the complaint there was no other witness who was able to give evidence for the prosecution. In these circumstances, applying the rule laid down by the Full Bench in Heman Ram's case, AIR 1945 Lah 201, by which I consider myself bound, I find no escape from the conclusion that the complainant is not entitled to add to the list of his witnesses, and the order of the trial Court summoning G. D. Thappar, B.N. Soniand, Tarlock Chand is not sustainable in law…

Avoid cross at this stage since it is most specialised job.

You have to the opportunity to come out of the case make its fulll use.

The court ordered for cross even my counsel objection on this ground, in the order court wrote that admisibility of this evidence will be decided later on. my counsel completed the cross, now next dt is fixed for s.313, can i make a detailed statement for s.313 or it is  i have to answer what the court says. i want to call the banks also for some documents, banks are in his witness list,  how can i do, my counsel told me it is over since now it is s.313. Pl help.

You are trying to ride on two trains so accidents are bound to happen.

EITHER you let your advocate do what he thinks fit.

Or you seek advice on such pbulic forum and confuse your self and your advocate also.

Maruji, i think all people asking doubts on this forum, has advocate for the case, still they ask for doubts to assurance. Pl help and support and understand anxiety in the mind of accused. I will not have come here if no doubt or no anxiety.

You must allow your advocate to work in the manner he feels better.

1) Now you are seeking advice and not acting on it what is the use of seeking advice.

2) You had been advised by another expert not to cross and take this issue to higher court. YOU COULD HAVE WON THE CASE VERY EASILY.

3) Now still more confusion that you want to call bank people, actually it is the other side who should have called bank people. Your calling will be admission on your part and it may result case against you.

SO RIDING ON TWO TRAINS CAN CREATE CONFUSION ONLY.

we took objection, judge overruled in writing and asked us to cross, the banks are in other party witneslist and they were earliar called by him, even after cross prosecution adv asked judge to give time to prove some document, judge closed the prosecution evidence and fixed date under s.313.

Dear Mr. Raju, 

I have gone through all leads.  Please tell me whether complainant has proved that there is legal due debt or obligation on your part.

Rajiv Bhasin 

Advocate

Bhasin & Associates

bhasin.laws@yahoo.com

9811210505