PANKAJ BHANDARI,J. - (1.) Counsel for the petitioner has moved this miscellaneous petition aggrieved by orders dated 12.01.2017 and 22.11.2016 vide which the application filed by the petitioner under Section 315 Cr. P.C. was rejected with cost.
(2.) It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that petitioner's request for permitting him to lead evidence in defence has been rejected by the Court and the order has been upheld by the Revisional Court without any basis. The petitioner has a right to lead evidence in defence and unless he is permitted to lead evidence in defence, he would not be able to discharge the burden which is caste upon him under the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is further contended that the petitioner has filed an FIR against the complainant for misusing the cheque, the documents pertaining to the same are also relevant.
(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on "T. Nagappa v. Y.R. Muralidhar" 2008 SCC, Page 457 , wherein, the Apex Court has held that the accused has a right to fair trial. He has a right to defend himself as a part of his human as also fundamental right as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the right to defend himself and for that purpose adduce evidence is recognised by the Parliament in terms of section 243(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.;