NI Court, Commercial Court Proceedings Stand On Equal Footing; Accused Entitled To Original Records For Defence: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court has held that proceedings before a Court established under the Negotiable Instruments Act and a Commercial Court stand on an equal footing, and an accused cannot be denied access to original records necessary for his defence merely because they have been summoned in parallel proceedings. The bench of Justice Baljinder Singh Sandhu observed that the right to a fair trial includes access to materials required for effective cross-examination and defence, and set aside a trial court order refusing to summon records relating to a criminal case alleging interpolation of a cheque.“Once the original record is available and the matter pertains to interpolation in the cheque and counter-foil, certainly the original cheque has to be put across to the complainant in the cross-examination and the same purpose cannot be solved by submitting photocopy or the certified copy. Therefore, it is the right of the petitioner to put up his defence and best opportunity is required to be given to him,” Court said.For context, the respondent had instituted a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner, which was pending before the NI Court. Simultaneously, alleging that the cheque in question had been misused and interpolated, the petitioner lodged an FIR against the respondent, pursuant to which a criminal case was instituted and was pending trial before a criminal court. During the investigation, the police seized and collected several original documents, including the cheque-book counterfoil containing the respondent's handwriting and endorsements, as well as the original Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report. These records had subsequently been summoned by the Commercial Court pursuant to an order of the High Court. Claiming that the original documents were necessary to effectively confront the respondent during cross-examination in the proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act, the petitioner moved an application seeking summoning of the original records. The trial court, however, rejected the plea, holding that summoning the records would unnecessarily delay the proceedings before the Commercial Court and amount to overreaching the High Court's directions. It further observed that certified copies of the documents were sufficient for the purpose. Challenging this order, the petitioner approached the High Court. After hearing the parties, the High Court observed that where proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act are dependent on a cheque which has allegedly been found to be interpolated in parallel criminal proceedings, the accused has a right to summon the original records in order to effectively confront the complainant and set up a proper defence. The Court further held that the proceedings before the NI Court and the Commercial Court stood on an equal footing and that the records were necessary in both matters to ensure a fair trial and a just conclusion. Merely because the records had been summoned in another proceeding, the petitioner could not be made to suffer. Referring to Section 94 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Court noted that the provision empowers courts to summon documents or other material necessary for the purposes of an inquiry or trial. While observing that the width of this power is extensive, the Court added that its exercise is subject to the requirements of necessity and desirability. “The first and foremost requirement of Section 94 BNSS (91 CrPC) is that the document sought to be summoned should be necessary or desirable, and if this condition is fulfilled, the same has to be looked into to arrive at a just and fair conclusion in the trial.” In the facts of the case, the Court found that the cheque formed the foundation of the proceedings and that the alleged interpolation went to the root of the dispute, affecting the very sustainability of the complaint. It therefore held that a balance had to be maintained between the two proceedings. Accordingly, the Court set aside the trial court's order rejecting the petitioner's application and directed that the original records be transmitted from the Commercial Court to the NI Court on the next date of hearing. It further directed that, in the event of any clash between hearing dates in the two proceedings, the courts concerned would suitably adjust the schedule. The petition was accordingly allowed.Title: Sushma Dayal v Praveen LodhaCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 290Click Here To Read/Download Order

NI Court, Commercial Court Proceedings Stand On Equal Footing; Accused Entitled To Original Records For Defence: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Agrawal

NI Court, Commercial Court Proceedings Stand On Equal Footing; Accused Entitled To Original Records For Defence: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers