Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

7. Statement of accused under Section 313 Cr. PC was recorded on 18.12.2018 wherein it was stated that the accused has not taken any loan from the complainant. It was stated that four cheques were given to Parveen Kumar for converting the property of his father into free hold after which his father expired. The accused stated that the complainant has misused the cheque in question.

8. An application was filed u/s 315 Cr. PC on behalf of accused which was allowed and accused was examined as DW­1. DW­1 in his examination in chief stated that for getting property bearing no. C­201 DDA Flats Kalkaji, New Delhi converted into free hold from lease hold, he had given four blank cheques to Parveen in 2015. On Parveen's statement that the said cheques had been lost, he gave four more blank unsigned cheques to him and Parveen also took 6­7 blank signed papers from the accused and his father. DW­1 was cross examined and discharged and vide a separate statement defence evidence was closed vide order dated 12.03.2019. The matter was put for final arguments. Subsequently, CC No.625158/16 Page no. 4 of 12 an application u/s 311 CrPC was filed on behalf of the accused for examining the wife and younger brother of the accused as DW­2 and DW­3 which was allowed. DW­2 and DW­3 supported and reiterated the version of DW­1 in their examinations­in­chief. They deposed that the father of the accused asked Parveen to convert his property into freehold and the accused gave four cheques to Parveen. They further deposed that in September, 2015, Parveen asked for four more cheques on the pretext that the previous cheques were lost and after the death of the father of the accused, the accused and his family members started receiving legal notices. DW­3 brought court summons in case titled "Govind Bhalla v. Sohan Lal & Ors." (Ex. DW­3/A) and also brought notification for New Circle rates dated 15.12.2015 (Mark A) according to which the market value of DW­3's flat is approximately Rs. 50 lacs. DW­2 and DW­3 were cross­examined by Ld. Counsel for complainant and the matter was again listed for final arguments. The parties have been heard at length and relevant record has been perused.