NIRMAL YADAV, J. - (1.) THE present petition is directed against the order dated 27.4.2005 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patiala, whereby the petitioner's application seeking permission to recall the complainant for crossexamination with regard to certain material facts, has been rejected.
(2.) THE facts in brief, are that respondent-Mohinder Kaur filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against the petitioner alleging that petitioner had issued a cheque bearing No. 509299 dated 7.6.2003 of Oriental Bank of Commerce, Main Bazar, Gurbax Colony, Patiala for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- in favour of the complainant. The complainant deposited the above cheque in her account in the State Bank of Patiala, Model Town, Patiala for its encashment. When the said cheque was presented to the Oriental Bank of Commerce, it was returned vide memo dated 13.6.1003 of State Bank of India with the endorsement "account of the accused (petitioner) has already been closed". The complainant issued a legal notice dated 27.6.2003 through her counsel demanding the amount of cheque from the accused. The notice was duly served on the petitioner. However, the petitioner failed to satisfy the claim of the complainant and, therefore, she filed complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patiala. The accused was summoned by the Court concerned. During trial, the complainant closed her evidence on 15.3.2005 and the case was adjourned to 23.4.2005 for effecting compromise between the parties. On 23.4.2005, some other counsel, namely, Shri S.S. Kler appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Since compromise was not effected between the parties, therefore, the case was adjourned to 27.4.2005 for further proceedings. On 27.4.2005, petitioner filed the application seeking to recall the complainant, which was dismissed by the trial court, mainly on the ground that negligence or fault of previous counsel could not be a ground for recalling the witness. The petitioner (accused) is adopting delaying tactics by filing the application. The learned trial Court further mentioned that the case is already at the stage of recording statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and documents, if any, which need to be put to the complainant, can be proved by the accused while leading his defence evidence.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.;