2022 (8) TMI 412 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonor of Cheque - petitioner had denied his right to fair trial which is enshrined in Article 21 of the constitution of India - HELD THAT - The ground for rejection is just and proper, in as much as the petitioner got sufficient opportunity to exhibit and prove the same while he had examined two defence witness. Filing of the petition after closing of the evidence, that too while the case was posted for argument, naturally raised doubt about the bonafideness of the petitioner. This court is not oblivious of the fact that a fair opportunity is required to be given to both the parties; else their right to fair trial will be impaired. But, at the same time this court is also conscious of the fact that where two views are reasonably possible and the lower court has taken one view, the revisional court should not substitute its own view. The petitioner had admitted having issued the cheque in question to the complainant and also admitted his signature and also admitted that the seal thereon is of his firm. He further admitted having dues on Rs. 96,049/after payment of Rs. 10,000/, on 07.11.2016. He had also admitted having deals with J.S. Pharmaceuticals since 2014, and that he had issued the cheque in question as security to Mr. A.K. Saha, who was the Manager of J.S. Pharmaceuticals. This being the factual position, the petitioner cannot escape from discharging his reverse burden as held by the learned court below. This being the admitted factual position, the petitioner had no convincing answer as to what purpose will be served by sending the admitted cheque to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory for scientific opinion. Thus, to the considered opinion of this court, the learned court below has not committed any illegality or impropriety in rejecting the petition No. 7174, filed by the petitioner. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to legality, propriety, and correctness of the order dated 01.04.2021 by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate in C.R. Case No. 1873/2017 under Sections 397/401 read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a small businessman, contested a complaint case alleging dishonored cheque issuance. The petitioner sought to file documents under section 294 Cr.P.C. and section 243 of the Code of Criminal procedure. The petitioner challenged the dismissal of these petitions, claiming denial of fair trial rights under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

The petitioner argued that filing under section 294 was to rectify a defect and cited relevant case laws. The respondent disputed the documents, contending section 294 was inapplicable. The court examined the grounds for rejection, emphasizing the petitioner's opportunity to present evidence during the case.

The court found the rejection of the petition justifiable, considering the petitioner's delay in filing and the need for fair trial for both parties. The court also addressed the petition under section 243, where the petitioner sought forensic examination of a disputed cheque. The court upheld the lower court's decision, as the petitioner admitted issuing the cheque and failed to provide a convincing reason for forensic examination.

The court differentiated the current case from cited precedents, finding no merit in the petitioner's arguments. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with each party bearing their own costs. The judgment emphasized the importance of fair trial while upholding the lower court's decisions based on the evidence and circumstances presented.