Complainant is fraudster or habitual fabricator is not relevant for cheque bounce case [Read the Order]

Accused wanted to show that the complainant was habitual to fabricate and to misuse such document in his favour.

May 12, 2019:

Madhya Pradesh High Court has found no illegality in trial court order declining the request of an accused of cheque bounce case for summoning of certain record to show that complainant is habitual fabricator.

A bench of Justice Virender Singh passed the order in the case titled as Prahlad @ Santosh S/o Baghsingh Rajpoot vs Sunil S/o Shri Chhaganlalji Jaiswal on 08.05.2019.

In a cheque bounce case, the accused wanted to call original Register of stamp vendor Shri Mahendra Thakkar from Sub-Registrar Officer, Rajpur and the Technician/Officer of India Security Press, Nasik to prove that the respondent/complainant is fraudster and he is habitual of fabricating false documents and has also fabricated agreement to sale dated 31.3.2011 executed between respondent/complainant Sunil Jaiswal and Ashok S/o Deviprasad Jaiswal with regard to sale of truck bearing registration No. MP-09KB-6627 for consideration of Rs.3,82,000/-.

The application was rejected by the trial court. Sessions court negated the challenge. Matter then came to the High Court.

High Court observed "Both the Courts below considered this fact and concluded that the dispute between the parties is related to dishonor of cheque drawn by the petitioner and the sale agreement executed for the sale of a vehicle is in no manner related to the dispute between the parties pending before the Courts and while allowing other prayer of the petitioner made by the same application, dismissed the prayer relating to the document/sale agreement dated 31.3.2011".

It further observed "Through the documents proposed to be produced, the petitioner only wants to show that the respondent is not a law abiding person but a fraudster and habitual to fabricate the documents".

High Court ultimately dismissed the petition by saying "Certainly, the proposed documents are not related with the dispute pending between the parties in respect of dishonour of cheque issued by the petitioner. I do not find any illegality or perversity in the order of both the Courts below".

Read the Order here:

Picture Source :