Smti. Mamoni Borah v. The State of Assam and Anr

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010162682024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCrl.Pet./977/2024o SMTI.oMAMONIoBORAHo W/OoLT.oPRANABoCHANDRAoBORAH,oR/OoFLAToNO.-1D,oKAMALo RESIDENCY,oSANKARDEVoNAGARoPATH,oHENGRABARI,oP.O.-ASSAMo SACHIVALAYA,oP.S.-DISPUR,oDIST-oKAMRUPo(M),oASSAM,oGUWAHATI-781006 VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDoANRo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoPUBLICoPROSECUTOR,oASSAM 2:SMTI.oMANJUoDUTTA oW/OoLT.oDIBAKARoBORA oR/OoH/NO.o199 oTETELITALoODALBAKRA oP.O.-KAHILIPARA oDIST-oKAMRUPo(M) oASSAM oGUWAHATI-78101o AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oB.oDAS,o AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oPP,oASSAM,oo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/3 :: BEFORE :: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R

21.08.2024

Heard Mr. B. Das, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam representing the State.

¶2This is an application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing the impugned order dated 20.06.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (M) Guwahati in C.R. Case No.2422/2020.

¶3The petitioner has been facing a trial for committing an offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. After closure of hearing of evidence of both sides, and when the case was posted for argument, the petitioner filed an application under Section 91 and 311 of the CrPC before the trial court stating that the Respondent No.2/the complainant did not prove her income tax returns to prove that she had the financial capacity to issue a loan to the present petitioner.

¶4The trial court rejected the prayer for certain reasons which do not deserve to be discussed in this case.

¶5After hearing the learned counsel of both sides, this Court is of the opinion that the learned trial had correctly rejected the prayer of the present petitioner. This Court finds that the said petition was filed by the present petitioner just to delay disposal of the case before the trial court.

¶6The present petition is devoid of any merit and therefore, stands dismissed Page No.# 3/3 and disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant