LAXMI vs PRAHLAD CHAND

Judgment text excerpt

$~88 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 09thApril, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 2645/2026 & CRL.M.A. 10750/2026 LAXMI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nikhil Chauhan, Advocate. versus PRAHLAD CHAND .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is facing trial for committing offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. The complaint in question is of the year 2022 and the cheque amount is Rs.52,125/-. 3. The statement of accused has already been recorded under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). 4. The petitioner herein had filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for re-calling of the complainant and is aggrieved by the dismissal of his such application. 5. This Court has gone through the impugned order dated 10.02.2026. The counsel for the accused had, merely, claimed before the learned Trial Court that it was on account of ill-advice of her previous counsel and also on account of the fact that she was unable to understand the legal language of the Signature Not Verified Signed By:SONIA CRL.M.C. 2645/2026 1 THAPLIYAL Signing Date:13.04.2026 10:31:04 Court that there was no cross-examination of the complainant and, therefore, sought permission to re-call the complainant for cross-examination. 6. The abovesaid order would also indicate that the right of the accused to cross-examine the complainant was closed on 06.07.2024, after giving various opportunities. Order dated 06.07.2024, copy of which has been enclosed, would also indicate that the accused had not even furnished her bail bonds despite multiple opportunities and when she was given opportunity to cross-examine the complainant on 03.04.2024 and, thereafter, on 20.05.2024, she did not avail any s