LCI Learning
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Ravikant Soni (LAWYER IN JAIPUR)     14 October 2010

NI act bank matter

Dear all,

In my case a bank sued a criminal complaint against my client u/s 138 NI act. Complainant was then manager of the bank.

Today in evidence existing manager (not of the time of filing complaint) came in witness box and testified his evidence on behalf of former manager in hearsay manner. 

and complainant lawyer closed evidence for his side.

is it good for my case or not???



Learning

 7 Replies

madhu mittal (director)     14 October 2010

 Please have a look of the decision  of  Hon SUPREME COURT OF INDIA,Criminal Appeal No. 1239 of 1997,Decided On: 16.12.1997,Appellants: Associated Cement Co. Ltd.Vs.
Respondent: Keshvanand, Para 25, it may solve your problem.

adv. rajeev ( rajoo ) (practicing advocate)     14 October 2010

The complainant who has filed the complaint must be present for evidence.  What was the cross examination could you post it in detail.

R.Ramachandran (Advocate)     14 October 2010

The particular paragraph of the decision which Madhu Mittal was referring to reads as under:

"we suggest as a pragmatic proposition that no magistrate shall insist that the particular person, whose
statement was taken on oath at the first instance, alone can continue to  represent the  company  till  the end  of  the proceedings. There  e may  be  occasions  when a  different person can  represent the company e.g. the particular person who represents the company at the first instance may either retire for,  the company's service or may otherwise cease to associate therewith  or he would be transferred to a distant place. In  such cases  it would be practically difficult for the company  to continue  to make  the same person represent the company  in the  court .  In any  such eventuality it is open to  the de  jure complainant company to seek permission of the court for  sending any other person to represent the company in the court.."

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE )     14 October 2010

All the above advice has a counter rider , the section 60 of evidence act.

Yes any person can appear on behalf of the unatural person only but he he / she must be able to depose from prsonal knowledge only. If things did not happen before him / her there is no value of such testimony.

No SC citation has overruled section 60 of evience act.

Nu.Delhi.Law.Fora. (Advocate-on-Record Supreme Court of India)     14 October 2010

Dear All,

 

Subject to correction, a company can be represented by any person duly authorised by a valid board resolution. As regards a initial complainant and subsequent person, although both representing the company, can depose before a court of law, but from different footing. As per my understanding on law on evidence, the subsequent person's knowledge may be based on official records or he may be an employee of the company during the tenure of the first complainant and on the strength of the same, he may depose which would be valid piece of evidentiary value.

 

Trust this would suffice.

 

Rabin Majumder
Advocate & Attorney
For Nu.Delhi.Law.Fora.
New Delhi

A.P.Loganathan (advocate Madras High Court)     14 October 2010

dear Mr.Ravikanth Soni

The case from the bank is not filed by the name of the person it is filed by the name of the bank. So the present manager can give evidence. Who ever the manager of the bank will submit the details of the accused transaction and other cheque details and balance in his account availabl with the bank records.As the records with the bank , plays vital role in the evidence any officer authorised by the complianant bank can submit the same to the court.

It is formal and routine. This in no way favours or affects the defence side

Advocate, Madras High Court

Adesh Kumar Sharma (Senior Associate Lawyer)     20 October 2010

Dear Mr. Soni,

No one can testify on behalf of other. If the complaint was filed by some other authorised representative and later on he is not available to testify on behalf of the complainant, then the complainant first has to substitute other authorised representative to pursue the case. So you tell us that the complainant has got substituted the present manager as its authorised representative or not, if not then his testimony has no value being not authorised to depose on behalf of complainant.

Secondly you tell us that whether his name was mentioned in the witness list or not. If he was in witness list then he can depose as a witness on behalf of complainant. So you tell that he deposed as witness or as authorised representative of the complainant.

Thanks


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register