Delhi High Court - Orders
Mrs. Kanta Goel vs Mr. Atul Gupta on 1 March, 2023
Author: Rajnish Bhatnagar
Bench: Rajnish Bhatnagar
$~27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 1397/2023
MRS. KANTA GOEL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Bhavesh Kr. Sharma, Advocate.
versus
MR. ATUL GUPTA ..... Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR
ORDER
% 01.03.2023 CRL.M.A. 5393/2023
1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 1397/2023 AND CRL.M.A. 5392/2023
3. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for setting aside/quashing the impugned order dated 08.12.2022 passed by learned Principal District and Session Judge whereby further opportunity to cross-examine the petitioner/complainant was granted to the respondent/accused with regard to her sources of income and financial capacity in providing loan to the respondent/accused, and for setting aside/quashing of order dated 20.07.2022.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that by virtue of the impugned order dated 08.12.2022, learned Principal Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAMAL KANT MENDIRATTA Signing Date:07.03.2023 11:43:59 District and Session Judge has granted limited permission to cross- examine the petitioner/complainant in respect of her source of income and financial capacity to extend the loan in question and on this account, the petitioner has been cross-examined at length and even otherwise, it does not lie in the mouth of the respondent to challenge the financial capacity of the petitioner to grant loan.
5. The relevant portion of the impugned order dated 08.12.2022 reads as follows:-
"7. In view of the above facts & circumstances of the case, reasons mentioned in the revision petition, reply to revision petition, the impugned order, the judgments relied upon by the Ld. Counsel for the parties and the materials on record, I am of the considered opinion that on 06.09.2019 CE was closed and on 31.10.2019 statement u/s 313 of accused was recorded. Thereafter, the matter was kept pending for DE on one pretext or the other and also clue to pandemic of Covid-
19. Complainant is the material witness in the present case. A party should not be deprived of his/her right to prove his/her innocence. The respondent-herein/accused-therein has taken the plea that complainant was not cross-examined with respect to her source of income and financial capacity to extend the loan in question. The respondent-herein has also undertaken to restrict his cross-examination only to the aspect / grounds mentioned in the application u/s 311 CrPC. The spirit of Section 311 CrPC is to do justice and to prevent failure of justice. Recalling of complainant for her recross- examination essential for the just and proper adjudication this case. The judgments relied upon by the Ld. Counsel for the revisionist are are distinguishable from the facts and circumstances of the present case. Therefore, the Ld. Trial Court has rightly passed the impugned order dt.20.07.2022. Thus, this revision petition is devoid of any merits and the same is dismissed. Trial Court Record be sent back along with copy of this order to Ld. Trial Court. Parties as well as counsel are directed to appear before the Ld. Trial Court on 11.01.2023. Revision file be consigned Room."
6. Issue notice to respondent, on steps being taken by the petitioner by all possible modes, returnable on 26th July 2023.
7. Trial court proceedings are stayed till the next date of hearing.
RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J MARCH 1, 2023 p