CRLP/5384/2006 of M/s Recon Agrotech Ltd., Vs M/s Haritha Pesticides rep. by Partner Yarragalla - on 31 December 2009

COMMON ORDER:

These two petitions are filed by the complainant/respondent inthe appeal, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., questioning the orders dated30.10.2006 passed by the VII Additional District & Sessions Judge(Fast Track Court), Vijayawada in Crl.M.P.Nos.48 of 2006 and 49 of2006 in Criminal Appeal No.114 of 2004, by which the lower appellateCourt allowed the petitions permitting the accused/appellants to recallP.W.1 and to summon Branch Manager, Andhra Bank, Patnam BazarBranch, Guntur.

The petitioner/complainant filed C.C.No.1325 of 2002 on the fileof VI Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada against the respondents 1 to3/accused Nos.1 to 3 for offence punishable under Section 138 of theNegotiable Instruments Act. After trial, the Magistrate convicted A1 toA3 and sentenced them by judgment dated 3.6.2004. As against thesaid convictions and sentences, A1 to A3 filed Criminal AppealNo.114 of 2004 in the court of VII Additional Sessions Judge (FastTrack Court), Vijayawada. During pendency of that appeal, theappellants/A1 to A3 filed Crl.M.P.No.9 of 2006 under Section 391Cr.P.C., for receiving certain documents as additional evidence in thatappeal. The lower appellate Court by order dated 1.2.2006 allowedthe said petition receiving documents as additional evidence in the appeal. As consequence of receipt of additional evidence, theappellants/A1 to A3 filed Crl.M.P.Nos.48 of 2006 and 49 of 2006 in thelower appellate Court under Section 311 Cr.P.C., to recall P.W.1 andto summon Branch Manager of Andhra Bank, for purpose of provingthe said additional documents. As consequence of the order dated1.2.2006 in Crl.M.P.No.9 of 2006, the lower appellate Court allowedCrl.M.P.Nos.48 of 2006 and 49 of 2006.

While so, the petitioner/complainant filed Crl.P.No.1101 of 2006in this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., questioning the order dated1.2.2006 passed by the lower appellate Court in Crl.M.P.No.9 of 2006. This Court by the order dated 27.6.2006 in Crl.P.No.1101 of 2006, setaside the order dated 1.2.2006 in Crl.M.P.No.9 of 2006 passed underSection 391 Cr.P.C and giving liberty to the lower appellate Court todecide relevancy and admissibility of the documents proposed to befiled as additional evidence at the time of final hearing of the appeal. As a consequence of the said order passed by this Court, I am of theopinion that two impugned orders dated 30.10.2006 are also liable tobe set aside with the same observations.

Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 30.10.2006 are setaside; and however, it is made clear that the lower appellate Court canconsider recalling of P.W.1 and summoning of Branch manager ofAndhra Bank, Patnam Bazar Branch, Guntur, in case the lowerappellate Court decides to receive additional documents in the appealafter considering their relevancy and admissibility. With the saidobservation, both the Criminal Petitions are disposed of.

_________________________________

Justice Samudrala Govindarajulu

Date: 31[st] December, 2009

Nn.

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU

CRIMINAL PETITION NOs :5384 & 5385 OF 2006

31.12.2009