THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1576 OF 2010 ORDER: 1 The petitioner herein was tried by the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kurnool for the offence punishable under section 138 of N.I. Act and the trial court after full fledged trial came to the conclusion that the petitioner is guilty of the said offence and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. Questioning the said judgment, the petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No.32 of 2009 and the same is pending. During the pendency of the said appeal, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.165 of 2010 under section 294 of Cr.P.C to receive certain documents as additional evidence. The appellate court, having considered the said submissions, allowed the said application by its order dated 09.04.2010. However, pursuant to the said order, it appears that the petitioner has not produced any document as additional evidence. Though sufficient time has been given, as the petitioner has not produced any documents for the purpose of additional evidence, the appellate court passed an order on 13.07.2010 as follows: “As seen from the record, already sufficient time was granted and no further time need be granted. Hence treating no additional evidence, for arguments adjourned to 22.07.2010.” 2 Coming to know that the matter is posted for arguments, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.1312 of 2010 under section 391 of Cr.P.C. requesting the court to take the scheduled documents as additional evidence on his behalf and mark them as exhibits. However, the said application is dismissed. The same is questioned in this revision. 3 Heard. 4 The earlier application filed by the petitioner i.e. Crl.M.P.No.165 of 2010 filed under section 294 of Cr.P.C. was allowed on 09.04.2010. When the said application was allowed and the petitioner was permitted to file the said documents for the purpose of receiving the same as additional evidence, the petitioner should have been diligent enough and file the same at the earliest point of time. But from the order impugned in this revision, it is clear that the petitioner took several adjournments and failed to file the said documents. In that context the said order was passed on 13.07.2010 stating that there is no additional evidence and the matter shall be posted for arguments. In fact, it cannot be said that there is any illegality or irregularity in the said order passed by the appellate court. However, taking the facts and circumstances into consideration, this court is of the view that one more opportunity may be given to the petitioner to file the said documents i.e. schedule documents. However, the said indulgence can be shown by putting some conditions. 5 Accordingly, this revision is allowed, the order dated 13.07.2010 passed by the appellate court is set aside, however, on condition of the petitioner paying costs of Rs.5,000/- to the District Legal Services Authority, Kurnool within a period of two weeks from today and the petitioner is hereby permitted to file the schedule documents into the court within a period of four weeks from today. On ascertaining the fact that the petitioner has paid the said costs, the appellate court may proceed with case in accordance with law as and when the said documents are filed into the court. _____________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 26th October 2010 Kvsn