VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2026 › High Court of Delhi

Abdul Khalid v. Gurdayal Singh

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
24 August 2026
Bench
Manoj Jainauthor
Case no.
CRL.M.C. 8525/2024

Judgment

J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶1Both the petitions being connected have been taken up together.

¶2Petitioner herein is facing prosecution for commission of offence under Section 138 of Negotiable of Instruments Act, 1881.

¶3There are two separate complaints i.e. CC No. 760/2022 titled as M/s Gurdayal Singh Vs. M/s Vastrani Export Pvt. Ltd and CC No. 700/2022 titled

CRL.M.C. 8524/2024 & CRL.M.C. 8525/2024 2

as M/s Bir Horizons Vs. M/s Vastrani Export Pvt. Ltd.

¶4When these complaints were taken up by the learned Trial Court on

18.03.2024, statements of accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and simultaneously, accused was also permitted to be examined under Section 315 Cr.P.C. On the next date, learned counsel for accused though informed that the accused Company had been in moratorium, no evidence was led. Learned Trial Court granted one last opportunity to lead evidence on

20.08.2024. On said date, the accused, instead, prayed for placing on record certain more documents and the learned Trial Court closed his right to lead evidence in defence and the matter was fixed for final arguments.

¶5Such orders are under challenge.

¶6The next date before the learned Trial Court is stated to be 28.09.2026 for hearing final arguments. When these petitions were taken up by the learned Predecessor Bench on 25.10.2024, while issuing notice, the learned Trial Court was also directed to defer the hearing and, therefore, is no further progress in the matters.

¶7Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner i.e. accused, merely, seeks last and final opportunity to enter into witness box in his defence and would not be examining any other witness.

¶8Learned counsel for respondent opposes the prayer, contending that accused, merely, wants to delay the inevitable. However after some arguments, albeit, without prejudice to their rights and subject to imposition of heavy cost, they express their no objection to grant of one last and final opportunity.

¶9Keeping in mind the overall facts of the case and in the interest of justice, both the petitions are hereby allowed with the limited direction to the

CRL.M.C. 8524/2024 & CRL.M.C. 8525/2024 3

petitioner i.e. accused Abdul Khalid to enter into witness box in terms of Section 315 Cr.P.C. and to examine himself. He would be entitled to one last and final opportunity. However, for causing delay in the matters, he is burdened with a cost of Rs. 20,000/- for each case. The cost be paid to the complainant before the learned Trial Court on the next fixed date i.e.

28.09.2026 itself and on said date, the accused would be permitted to examine himself. This shall be, however, subject to convenience of the Board position of learned Trial Court.

¶10Needless to say, the learned Trial Court shall not give any unnecessary adjournment to the accused, unless there is some compelling reason. It is also made clear that the abovesaid order merely permits the accused to enter into witness box and he would not be permitted to examine any other witness.

¶11Both the petitions stand disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶12Pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶13A copy of this order be sent to learned Trial Court for information and compliance.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

AUGUST 24, 2026/sw/js

Case details

Parties and counsel

CRL.M.C. 8524/2024 & CRL.M.C. 8525/2024 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 24th August, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC010738122024 + CRL.M.C. 8524/2024&CRL.M.A. 32532/2024 ABDUL KHALID .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhan Mohan, Mr. Ravi Mishraw, Ms. Tanisha Bhatia, Ms. Ananya Mishra, Ms. Shivani, Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocates. versus BIR HORIZONS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vijay Kingar, Advocate with respondent. # CNR No. DLHC010738132024 + CRL.M.C. 8525/2024&CRL.M.A. 32531/2024 ABDUL KHALID .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhan Mohan, Mr. Ravi Mishraw, Ms. Tanisha Bhatia, Ms. Ananya Mishra, Ms. Shivani, Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocates. versus GURDAYAL SINGH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vijay Kingar, Advocate with respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.