In CRM-M-50482-2018-PUNJ HC- P&H HC allows two effective opportunities to petitioner Firm for leading its evidence in cheque dishonour case by producing Income Tax Official along with relevant record subject to payment of cost
Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj [15-02-2023]  

Read Order: Master Collection v. Jatinder Kaur

Monika Rahar 

Chandigarh, February 20, 2023: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted the petitioner-firm two effective opportunities for leading its evidence in a cheque dishonour case by producing the Income Tax Official along with relevant record, subject to payment of Rs 25,000. 

The Bench of Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj held, "In view of the above discussion, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner should be granted two effective opportunities for leading its evidence subject to payment of costs of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant. The Trial Court would ensure that the petitioner in compliance of this order would pay the costs of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant and thereafter only two effective opportunities will be granted to the petitioner to lead its evidence by examining the above said official."

The present petition was filed for quashing the order of the JMIC, Ludhiana whereby application for examination and summoning of witness, was dismissed.

The petitioner's Counsel submitted that the petitioner-firm was falsely implicated by the complainant-respondent in the complaint filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. She submitted that the disputed cheque was for an amount of Rs.15 lakh which was allegedly dishonored and on account of the same the aforesaid complaint was lodged. 

It was submitted that though the cheque in question was issued by the petitioner to the complainant but the same was not in discharging of the liability as alleged in the complaint and that the same was issued in the name of M/s Karan Taxtiles Ltd. with whom petitioner had business dealings. 

She submitted that in order to prove the same petitioner filed an application for summoning the Income Tax official with the relevant record to prove that the cheque was issued to the complainant in a business transaction and not for the discharge of the liability as alleged in the complaint. It was also the Counsel's case that the examination of the Income Tax official along with the record pertaining to the year 2012 to 2018 was essential for the just decision of the case but the learned Trial Court passed the impugned order closing his defence evidence by order.

She submitted that the petitioner had every right to lead his defence and examine the witness and produce the relevant record for the just decision of the case but the court below wrongly declined the application filed by the petitioner. She further submitted that petitioner may be granted two effective opportunities for leading its evidence and the petitioner-firm would neither misuse the opportunities granted nor it would delay the trial in any way.

The complainant's counsel opposed the petitioner's submissions to submit that petitioner was granted numerous opportunities for leading defence evidence, however, despite repeated opportunities he did not produce the evidence intentionally and mischievously filed the application only in order to prolong the trial. He further submitted that application of the petitioner was rightly dismissed by the Trial Court and there was no illegality in the order passed by it.

After hearing the parties, the Court observed that the complainant led his evidence, however, application of the petitioner-accused for summoning the I.T. Official along with record was declined, thus, the defence evidence was closed by order by the court by passing the impugned order.

Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the court found that the petitioner-firm should be granted two effective opportunities for leading its evidence by producing the Income Tax Official along with relevant record and the opposite party can be compensated with costs.

In view of the above discussion, the court was of the opinion that the petitioner should be granted two effective opportunities for leading its evidence subject to payment of costs of Rs. 25,000/- to the complainant.

"The Trial Court would ensure that the petitioner in compliance of this order would pay the costs of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant and thereafter only two effective opportunities will be granted to the petitioner to lead its evidence by examining the above said official", the Court added. 

The petition was allowed in the aforesaid terms.