The Division Bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Manoj Misra of the Apex Court in the case of M/S BLS Infrastructure Limited Vs M/S Rajwant Singh & Ors held that where the Complainant had already been examined as a witness in the case, it would not be appropriate for the Court to pass an order of acquittal merely on non-appearance of the Complainant.
Brief Facts:
The Appellant was the Complainant in all 8 complaints filed against the Respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act of 1881.
The Complainant was subjected to cross-examination in three cases out of eight and the Accused alleged that the cross-examination in the three cases shall be adopted in the remaining complaints. Therefore, the evidence of the Complainant was closed and the matter was listed at the stage of defence evidence.
Thereafter, an application was filed under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 for summoning certain witnesses however, the Appellant didn’t appear and the complaints were dismissed for non-appearance.
Aggrieved by this, the order was challenged before the Delhi High Court by way of 8 petitions which were dismissed. Hence, the present appeals.
Contentions of the Appellant:
It was contended that while dismissing the complaint, the learned magistrate didn’t consider Section 256(1) of the Cr.P.C. Furthermore, it was contended that the Complainant's statement was recorded, and the Complainant was also put through a cross-examination. The case could have continued even if the Complainant was absent in these circumstances.
Contentions of the Respondent:
It was contended that the Complainant was absent after filing the application under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. and hence, dismissal of the complaint was the right decision. Furthermore, it was submitted that if there is a technical error in dismissing the complaint due to the Complainant's non-appearance, the decision will be interpreted as an acquittal under Section 256(1) of the Cr.P.C.
Observations of the Court:
As per Section 256(1), the Magistrate may overlook the Complainant's attendance when satisfied that it is unnecessary and proceed with the case. Such a circumstance may occur when the Complainant's/Prosecution's evidence has been recorded and the Complainant's attendance is not required.
The Hon’ble Court opined that if the Complainant had already been examined as a witness then, it would not be justified for the Court to pass an order of acquittal of the Accused merely based on the non-presence of the Complainant.
It was further observed that if the Complainant didn’t appear to press the application filed under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C., the Learned Magistrate could have rejected the application and proceeded with the case based on the evidence on record.
The decision of the Court:
Based on these considerations, the order of Acquittal which was passed by the Learned magistrate was set aside and accordingly, the appeals were allowed.
Case Title: M/S BLS infrastructure limited Vs M/S Rajwant Singh & Ors
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Hon’ble Justice Manoj Misra
Case No: Criminal Appeal Nos. 657-664 OF 2023
Citation: 2023 Latest Caselaw 157 SC
Advocate for the Appellant: Adv. Shri Maninder Singh
Advocate for the Respondent: Adv. Mr. Samrat Nigam
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
