Himachal Pradesh High Court
Chaman Sharma S/O Deep Chand vs Resident Of Village on 15 October, 2022
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 15th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA
.
CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) U/S 482 CR.P.C. NO.
963 of 2022
Between:
CHAMAN SHARMA S/O DEEP CHAND
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE & POST
OFFICE, SATAUN, TEHSIL KAMARU,
DISTRICT SIRMOUR, H.P. AGED
ABOUT 36 YEARS.
...PETITIONER
(BY MR. DHEERAJ K. VASHISHT,
ADVOCATE)
AND
RAHUL SHARMA S/O LYAK RAM
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
BHANGATA, TEHSIL SHILLAI,
DISTRICT SIRMOUR, H.P.
... RESPONDENT
(NEMO)
This petition coming on for orders this day, this Court
passed the following:
ORDER
By way of instant petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') and Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenge has been laid to ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 20:07:04 :::CIS 2 order dated 01.07.2022, whereby an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., seeking permission to produce additional evidence having been filed by petitioner-accused, has been dismissed.
.
2. Having regard to the nature of order proposed to be passed in the instant proceedings, this Court sees no necessity to issue notice to respondent, who in the event of notice being issued would be un-necessarily burdened to engage a counsel to defend himself in the instant proceedings, which can be disposed of today itself without the aid and assistance of the counsel, if any, on behalf of the respondent, on the basis of record.
3. Having heard learned counsel representing petitioner-
accused and perused the material available on record vis-a-vis reasoning assigned in the instant proceedings, this Court finds merit in the present petition and accordingly, same deserves to be allowed.
4. Precisely the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that the respondent instituted proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in the Court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Shillai, District Sirmour, H.P. alleging therein that cheque issued by petitioner-accused in discharge of his lawful liability has been dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. In the aforesaid proceedings petitioner-accused filed an application under Section 311 ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 20:07:04 :::CIS 3 Cr.P.C. seeking the permission of the Court to produce additional evidence. Though, notices were issued in the application and matter was ordered to be listed for consideration on 01.07.2022 vide order .
dated 25.06.2022, but interestingly, on 01.07.2022, Court below while granting time to the respondent to file reply to the application disposed of the application on the same day without assigning any reasons.
Careful perusal of order dated 01.07.2022, reveals that Court below in one line dismissed the application. No reason, if any, ever came to be assigned on record for dismissal of application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. having been filed by respondent-complainant. Though, order dated 01.07.2022 reveals that the application was ordered to be taken up after lunch for orders, but after lunch, Court below simply dismissed the application with one word "Dismissed".
5. Since no reason ever came to be assigned in the aforesaid order dismissing the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. having been filed by the petitioner-accused, this Court has no hesitation to conclude that there is no application of mind by the Court below while considering the prayer made on behalf of petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for leading additional evidence. Needless to say, application, if any, under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is to be decided by the Court below on the basis of pleadings as well as evidence led on record by respective ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 20:07:04 :::CIS 4 parties. Aforesaid approach adopted by the Court while deciding application in a slipshod manner is highly depreciable. Court below is directed to be more careful in future while dealing with the judicial .
matters.
6. Consequently in view of the above, present petition is allowed and impugned order dated 01.07.2022 is quashed and set-
aside. Court below is directed to decide the application afresh in accordance with law. Learned counsel representing applicant-petitioner undertakes to cause presence of his client in person or through counsel before the Court below on 02.11.2022, enabling him to decide the application afresh, expeditiously preferably within a period of six weeks.
Petition stands disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma) Judge October 15, 2022 (shivender) ::: Downloaded on - 15/10/2022 20:07:04 :::CIS