9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 412X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der, the learned court below had dismissed the petition No. 7172, dated 17.11.2017, filed under section 294 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for allowing him to file some documents and also dismissed another petition No. 7174 dated 17.11.2017 filed under section 243 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act for sending the disputed cheque to the Central Forensic Laboratory for scientific opinion. 2. The factual background, leading to filing of the present petition, is briefly stated as under: "The petitioner is a small businessman and running the business of medical supplies and also medicines in the name and style of M/Ss Barbhuyan Enterprise, situated at Village-Dudhpati, Madhuramukh, Sil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and that a petition under section 294 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be filed even after closing of evidence and that the grounds for rejection of the petition No. 7174 is also not justified and that the learned court below had invoked the provision of Section 20 and 87 of the negotiable Instrument Act which are not at all applicable and that the petitioner has the right to fair trial and by dismissing the same the petitioner had denied his right to fair trial which is enshrined in Article 21 of the constitution of India. Therefore it is contended to allow the petition by setting aside the impugned order. 4. I have heard Mr. O. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. T. Deori, learned counsel for the respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 01.04.2021, the learned court below has rejected the petition No. 7172, which was filed under section 294 of the Code of Criminal procedure, for allowing him to submit some documents:- (i) Document No. 1, to show that his transaction with the respondent starts in the year 2014, (ii) Document No. 2, the reply of the petitioner to the demand notice of the respondent, (iii) Document No. 3, the list of medicine dumped on the petitioner, (iv) Document No. 4 payment made by the petitioner to the respondent after receipt of demand notice, which he could not submit during time of adducing his defence evidence, on the ground that the petitioner got ample opportunity to exhibit the said documents while two of the D.W. had adduced their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de petition No. 7174, dated 17.11.2017, filed under section 243 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act prayed for sending the disputed cheque to the Central Forensic Laboratory for scientific opinion as according to him the same was shown to have issued in the year 2016, for discharge of his debt but in fact there was no such debt exist in the year and he issued the same in the year 2014 to one A.K. Saha as security and that material alteration has been done in the said cheque by overwriting the same. But, the learned court below has rejected the same on the ground that the petitioner had admitted in his evidence having been issued the same and also admitted his signature over there and even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
