M/S Indus Valley Exports vs Creations
2022 Latest Caselaw 3630 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

       S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 221/2022

M/s Indus Valley Exports, Address H-1-22 RIICO Industrial Area,
Mansarovar Jaipur Rajasthan Through Porprietor Pramod Rathore
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.     Creations, Through Owner Shri Sanjay Periwal S/o Shri
       Bhagirath Periwal R/o House No. 33, Sanjay Marg, Hatroi,
       District Jaipur Rajasthan.
2.     State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.B. Sharma Ganthola For Respondent(s) : Mr. F.R. Meena, PP Mr. Jaideep Malik

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

Order

09/05/2022

The petitioner on trial was convicted for offence(s) under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

At the appellate stage, the petitioner filed an application

under Section 391 of Cr.P.C. for bringing on record certain

documents as additional evidence to prove that the cheques were

not issued for payment of outstanding dues, rather the same were

issued as security. The impugned order would reveal that the

learned Lower Appellate Court observed that neither in the

complaint petition nor in any evidence, it has been stated that the

disputed cheques were for payment of some other bill or they

were handed over as security.

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-221/2022]

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid

finding is error of record which would be evident from the

testimony of Pramod Rahtore. Statements of the petitioner was

recorded before the Court below as D.W.1 and a copy of the same

is as Annexure-33. In the said statement, the petitioner

specifically stated that he was in business relationship with the

complainant. The petitioner's firm is a manufacturer and exporter

of clothes, whereas complainant was trader of clothes. The

petitioner had issued ten cheques undated in between 03.05.2013

to 07.05.2013 as security deposits vide cheque No.028695 to

028704. Therefore, the finding of the trial Judge is error of record.

Learned counsel for respondent/complainant contends that

the petitioner simply stated that the documents proposed to be

brought on record at the appellate stage, were with the Chartered

Accountant. If the petitioner had knowledge that these documents

were necessary for just decision in the trial, it cannot be a ground

to not bring those documents at the appropriate stage of trial after

obtaining from the C.A. nor the petitioner had filed any such

application before the trial Judge that the documents were with

the C.A. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of Iqbal

Ahmad v. State of U.P. & Ors. decided on 06.02.2020 and

Rambhau & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra decided by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court on 26.04.2001.

Since the main issue before this Court is whether the finding

of the Lower Appellate Court is vitiated by error of record or not.

This issue was not there in any of the judgments relied by learned

counsel for respondent/complainant. The record reveals, as

discussed above, that the aforesaid finding is vitiated by error of

record. Hence, the same cannot be allowed to stand.

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-221/2022]

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 20.12.2021 passed

by the Upper Sessions Judge No.5, Jaipur Metropolitan-II in

Criminal Appeal No.12/2021 is hereby quashed and the matter is

remitted back to the court below to pass fresh order according to

law.

This petition stands allowed accordingly.

Pending application/s, if any, also stands disposed of.

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J

Hemant/65

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)