JUDGMENT Mr. Mahesh Grover, J. (Oral):- This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. where the petitioners pray for quashing order dated 21.3.2013 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, in Complaint No.184/2 dated 25.4.2008, while exercising the powers under Section 311 Cr.P.C. 2. The learned trial court, while dealing with the controversy where petitioners issued cheques to the complainant for a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/-, which cheques were dishonoured subsequently, permitted recall of Mr. Sanjeev Singla to appear as complainant’s witness. 3. While questioning the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that recall of the aforesaid witness is totally erroneous and the complainant is trying to set up a new case under the garb of the examination of this witness. He has tried to demonstrate this aspect of the matter by reading the complaint and the statement of a witness namely Vivek Singla to contend that in this statement, a completely new case is being sought to be set up. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and noticing the material on record, I am of the opinion that the plea of the petitioners is misplaced. If the complaint is to be compared with the statement of Vivek Singla, then both are complementing each other and are not at variance to each other. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that even in the legal notice, there is no reference to the loan agreement. 6. Be that as it may, the fact remains that crux of the matter is that the petitioners were advanced loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- by the complainant and as a measure of discharge of this liability, cheques were issued by them which were dishonoured. This being the sole thrust of the complaint and the entire proceedings, the examination of the witness in question as permitted by the learned trial court vide its impugned order, seems to be completely in conformity with the objective of determining the controversy at hand. No perversity has been shown to have been committed by the said court. The powers under Section 311 Cr.P.C. are amply wide and confer the power on the court to examine, re-examine or recall any witness if it is, in the opinion of the court, essential for the just and proper adjudication of the matter. 7. No perversity has been shown to have been committed by the said court. The powers under Section 311 Cr.P.C. are amply wide and confer the power on the court to examine, re-examine or recall any witness if it is, in the opinion of the court, essential for the just and proper adjudication of the matter. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order and the petition is, therefore, dismissed. 8. The petitioners, obviously, would be at liberty to take all the pleas that they, in their wisdom, deem appropriate in the given set of circumstances of the case. ---------0.B.S.0------------