Full Order Text
Interim Order 2 · 30 Mar 2024 · CNR MHMM190050932018
Order Details: Order Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No.1951/SS/2018 Exh.44 ORDER BELOW EXH.44 1. This is an application filed by complainant under Section 311 of Cr. P.C to prove bank return memo and delivery of goods. 2. Brief contentions in the application are as under: Complainant has filed present complaint under Section 138 of N.I. Act. It is contended that original complainant had produced documents related to the transaction mentioned in the complaint and the matter is posted at the stage of argument. It is next contended that bank return memo is not exhibited as there was no seal of concerned bank. It is further contended that complainant wants to show delivery of goods to the accused and for that she wants to bring one more witness to prove the delivery of goods. She placed her reliance on the decision in the cases of Varsh Garg V/s. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors [2023 ALL MR (Cri) 720 (S.C.)] and in Vijay Chandra Mohan Khot and Anrs V/s. State of Maharashtra and another [2023 ALL MR (Cri) 1437]. I have gone through both the citations. She further contended that she is having good case on merit and in the interest of justice, seeking permission to call bank witness of her bank. Hence, this application. 3. Accused has filed his reply at (Exh.46) and objected the application. He has submitted that present application filed by complainant is not maintainable in the eyes of law. He next submitted that criteria to file application under Section 311 of Cr. P.C. is not fulfilled by the complainant. He further submitted that complainant had already closed her evidence and statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr. P.C. is recorded. He further submitted that he has cross-examined the complainant at length and the matter is posted for final argument. Now, complainant wants to examined two more witnesses. He lastly submitted that reasons mentioned in the application are not sufficient and enough to call the witness for cross-examination who are already cross-examined at length. Hence, he prayed to reject the application. -- 1 of 2 -- 2 C. C. No.1951/SS/2018 Exh.44 4. Heard advocate for both sides. 5. Perused record. It appears that cross-examination of C.W.1 is conducted by the accused and it is over on 13/06/2023. Complainant has filed her evidence closed pursis on 13/06/2023 and statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr. P.C. was recorded on 04/10/2023. Thereafter, complainant filed present application on 02/01/2024. Upon perusal of record it seems that complainant has not filed on record delivery challans upon which she wants to prove the delivery of goods to the accused. It appears that she is trying to fill up the lacuna in the case. Considering this fact and ground mentioned by complainant in the application, interest of justice requires that complainant may be given fair opportunity to put up her case. So application deserves to be allowed only with respect to call bank witness to prove bank return memo filed by the complainant on record. At the same time it cannot be ignored that there has been delay in the disposal of case due to her, so some cost is necessary to be saddled on her. In the result, I pass following order : ORDER 1. Application is partly allowed with respect to bank witness subject to payment of costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) to the bank witness. 2. Issue witness summons to bank witness on payment of cost amount. Date : 30/03/2024 Sd/- ( Shri. R.D. Dange ) Metropolitan Magistrate, 63rd Court, Andheri, Mumbai -- 2 of 2 --
