This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., paying to call for the records relating to the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.2/Fast Track Court, Madurai in Cr.M.P.No.5164 of 2016 in S.T.C.No.24 of 2016 dated 22.12.2016 and set aside the same.
2.It is averred in the petition that the petitioner/accused filed a petition before the trial Court under
Section 91 of Cr.P.C., seeking direction to the complainant to produce a document dated 05.12.2011, in the case filed by the respondent for the offences under Section 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instrument Act. The burden is heavy on the shoulders of the accused to rebut the presumption drawn against him. The document relied on and required is vital to rebut the presumption and prove his innocence. The trial Court, without even considering the deposition of the complainant, wherein, he agreed to produce the agreement now sought to be summoned, has dismissed the application. Therefore, the order of the Judicial Magistrate is liable to be set aside.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contends that the first agreement dated 05.12.2011 between the petitioner/ accused and the respondent/complainant is very much essential to rebut the presumption, that the respondent himself in his evidence admitted and agreed to produce the said document and therefore, the document is very essential and in view of giving fair opportunity, the order of the Judicial Magistrate has to be set aside and the petition is to be ordered.
4.The learned counsel for the respondent, per contra, contends that there are five agreements and one agreement dated 07.01.2013 has been marked as document in which, all the earlier documents have been cancelled and as per the agreement, the petitioner is bound to pay Rs.81 lakhs to the respondent. Further, the document now sought for is in no way relevant to establish the defence taken by the petitioner or to rebut the presumption and therefore, this petition is liable to be dismissed.
5.The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court the portions of the deposition of the complainant before the trial Court about the management of the company taken by him from 2011 and the existence of first agreement on 05.12.2011. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, other agreements including the last agreement dated 07.01.2013 have been marked. Even as per the agreement dated 07.01.2013, the petitioner is liable to pay Rs.81 lakhs to the respondent and there is a clause cancelling the earlier documents between the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioner failed to convince this Court as to the necessity of the document to establish his case or improbablise the case of the complainant. This Court is of the considered view that the document now sought for by the petitioner is not necessary for the trial and therefore, the trial Court has rightly dismissed the application. This Court does not see any reason to interfere with the orders of the Judicial Magistrate, by invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
6.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed.
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate, Melur.
.