Pramod Ranjan vs Fareed Khan
2024 Latest Caselaw 17611 Mad

Madras High Court

Pramod Ranjan vs Fareed Khan on 5 September, 2024

Author: G.Jayachandran

Bench: G.Jayachandran

                                                                           Crl.OP.No.20263 of 2024


                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                              DATED : 05.09.2024

                                                     CORAM

                             THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

                                   Criminal Original Petition No.20263 of 2024

                     Pramod Ranjan
                     Director, Coromandel Beach Properties Pvt. Ltd.,
                     Sivamegan Towers, 3rd Floor,
                     New No.211, Old No.142,
                     Vallivarkottam High Road, Nungambakkam,
                     Chennai 600 034.                                         ... Petitioner
                                                     Vs.

                     Fareed Khan,
                     C/o.Whitesands Freight Private Ltd.,
                     “Neonaz Beach Villa” Airport Road,
                     Southern End, Kavaratti,
                     Lakshadweep 682 555
                     Also at:
                     C/o.Whitesands Freight Private Ltd.,
                     Jain Housing, Kallur Kathrikadavu Road,
                     Ernakulam 682 017.                                       ... Respondent



                     Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code

                     of Criminal Procedure, praying to call for records of the XXV

                     Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore pertaining to its order dated 23rd July

                     2024 passed in Crl MP No.23924 of 2024 in C.C.No.7182 of 2019, set

                     aside the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     1/5
                                                                                 Crl.OP.No.20263 of 2024




                                        For Petitioner     : Mr.Gaurav Chatterjee


                                                           **********



                                                          ORDER

The petition has been filed by the complainant having aggrieved by

the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, who has allowed the

application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. to recall P.W.1, when the

matter was posted for judgment.

2. When P.W.1 in this case was examined in chief on 04.08.2023

and 06.09.2023, the accused has not cross-examined the witness and

after questioning him under 313(1) (b) of Cr.P.C. on 18.10.2023, the

case was adjourned for more than four occasions. The accused was

absent and bailable warrant was issued against him. The accused

surrendered on 09.12.2023, and got the warrant recalled, in such

circumstances when the matter was posted on 11.03.2024 for argument

and after hearing the arguments of the learned counsels, posted for

judgment on 25.04.2024. On the said date of judgment, the present

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

petition to recall under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. was filed and the same has

been entertained by the Trial Court. Being aggrieved by the said order,

the present criminal original petition is filed.

3. On a perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned

Judicial Magistrate, this Court finds that the Trial Court recording the

failure of the accused to cross-examine the witness in spite of affording

opportunity had took a lenient view that the accused in a complaint under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, as a reverse burden to

prove his innocence and therefore, opportunity to cross-examine the

complainant to be granted.

4. The reason stated to allow the petition under Section 311 of

Cr.P.C., is contrary to the dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Punjab, reported in CDJ 2015 SC

115. Therefore, this Court finds that when there is no sufficient cause

explained by the respondent accused for why he did not cross-examine

the witness when he was present on 04.08.2023 and 06.09.2023 and

waited till the matter reached the stage of pronouncing judgment. In such

circumstances, the application filed to recall ought to have been https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

dismissed, unfortunately the Trial Court has allowed the application

which is without any reason.

5. Hence the Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the order

passed by the Trial Court in Crl. MP No.23924 of 2024 dated

23.07.2024 hereby set aside.

05.09.2024

jv

Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No

To

1. The XXV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

jv

Criminal Original Petition No.20263 of 2024

05.09.2024

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis