JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 filed a complaint against the petitioner before the Judicial Magistrate First Class , Gharsana, District Sriganganagar stating that his firm is doing the business of Commission Agent and he is demanding money from the accused amounting to Rs. 1,15,231/- whereupon the accused gave one cheque for a sum of Rs. 40,000/- but the cheque was dishonoured by the Bank. Thereafter a complaint in this regard was filed in the court and the Magistrate took cognizance against the petitioner. 3. The petitioner moved an application under section 91 Criminal Procedure Code stating that no money is due against him and prayed for calling for the account books for the year 2004 to 2007, but the said application was dismissed vide order dated 20.04.2010 and ordered to call for record for the period from 14.02.2006 to 18.11.2006. Against the said order the petitioner filed a revision which was also dismissed by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Anupgarh, Camp Gharsna vide order dated 19.01.2011. Aggrieved by the above order, the petitioner has preferred this cri. misc. Petition. 4. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the trial court ordered for calling the record pertaining to the period 14.02.2006 to 18.11.2006 where as the petitioner has prayed for the record pertaining to 2004 to 2007. Thus, the learned trial court committed serious illegality , perversity and impropriety in passing this order. Counsel for the petitioner further contended that because the alleged transaction took place during the period from 2004 to 2007 , therefore, that record is relevant. 5. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the arguments. 6. I have perused the order of the learned trial court dated 20.04.2010 and the order of the revision court dated 19.01.2011. 7. As per the order of the learned trial court dishonoured cheque which is the subject matter of the trial has been issued by the accused relating to transaction for the period from 14.02.2006 to 18.11.2006 and the Cash Books which have been produced by the complainant belongs to this period. 8. 7. As per the order of the learned trial court dishonoured cheque which is the subject matter of the trial has been issued by the accused relating to transaction for the period from 14.02.2006 to 18.11.2006 and the Cash Books which have been produced by the complainant belongs to this period. 8. In my considered view, no illegality, impropriety and perversity has been committed by the learned trial court while passing the order dated 20.04.2010 and the same has been upheld by the learned revisional court vide order dated 19.01.2011. 9. Accordingly, the criminal misc. petition is dismissed and the order passed by the learned revisional court is maintained.Petition Dismissed. *******