Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Motion Re in Yashovardhan Birla vs Kamdhenu Enterprises Limited And Anr. on 23 November, 2023Matching Fragments
9. It is pertinent to note here that at the time of passing of the aforesaid order, the judgements in In Re: Expeditious Trial (supra) and Court on its Own Motion (supra) had not been passed. It is common knowledge that at that relevant point of time, various decisions giving similar direction as in the aforesaid order were passed, directing the parties to argue their case before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate at the stage of framing of notice under Section 251 of the CrPC. It is only after passing of the judgements as mentioned hereinabove, it is now settled that the learned Metropolitan Magistrate does not have any power to discharge an accused under Section 251 of the CrPC in a case under Section 138 of the NI Act.
(emphasis supplied)
15. In the backdrop of the aforesaid principles, a fact which was stated to have been suppressed, would be considered material, when it is shown that had it not been suppressed, then the same would have an effect on the rights of the parties determining the merits of the case. Similarly, when a material fact has been admitted by any party, in any previous proceedings, having an effect on determining the same lis between the parties in the subsequent proceedings, is suppressed, the same would also amount to suppression of material fact. The order dated 14.08.2014 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in the earlier petitions does not in any manner determine the lis between the parties as raised in present petitions and for that matter in the said earlier petitions. The aforesaid order simply permitted the petitioner herein to withdraw the petition at that time with liberty to raise the contentions in the petition before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate at the time of framing of notice under Section 251 of the CrPC which, at that point of time, was not opposed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent therein. As noted hereinabove, before, the judgments in In Re: Expeditious Trial (supra) and Court on its own motion (supra) had not been passed.