Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. I have heard Ms.R.Shase, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr.N.Manokaran, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

5. Ms.R.Shase, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, in the earlier rejection order, dated 18.05.2016, the trial Court had rejected the petition through which the petitioner sought for permission to examine the witnesses namely, the Bank Manager of the complainant's bank as well as the sister of the accused Sideswari. The reasons given by the trial Court at that time was that, even before cross-examining P.W.1, the petition was filed. More over, no reason has been specifically given for examining the complainant's Bank Manager and if at all, the petitioner wanted to examine these witnesses that would have been stated immediately after the questioning under Section 313 of the Code. By stating these reasons, earlier petition was rejected.