JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 26.6.2014 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer (hereinafter referred to as the Revisional Court) and the order dated 28.1.2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jaisalmer (hereinafter referred to as the Trial Court). 2. The proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 are pending against the petitioner in the Trial Court and in the said proceedings petitioner has moved an application under Section 91, CrPC and prayed that the cash-book and ledger of the complainant-respondent No. 2, regarding the transactions between him and the respondent No. 2, be summoned. In reply to the application under Section 91 CrPC the respondent No. 2 has informed the Court that the cash-book and ledger sought to be summoned by the petitioner are no more in existence and the same has been destroyed by him. 3. The Trial Court after taking into consideration this aspect of the matter has rejected the application of the petitioner while observing that if in future the complainant-respondent No. 2 reply upon the said cash-book and ledger then adverse inference will be taken against him. 4. The order dated 28.1.2014 passed by the Trial Court was challenged before the Revisional Court by way of criminal revision. The said criminal revision is dismissed vide order dated 26.6.2014. 5. Being aggrieved with these the petitioner has filed this criminal misc. petition. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Trial Court as well as the Revisional Court ha%'e erred in not observing that in these proceedings, at any point of time, if the complainant-respondent No. 2 places reliance on the cash-book and ledger, which were sought to be summoned by the petitioner, the Court shall take adverse inference against the respondent. 7. This Court is of the opinion that when the complainant-respondent No. 2 has clearly taken a stand before the Trial Court that the documents sought to be summoned by the petitioner arc no more in existence and if in future he relics on the said documents, the Trial Court shall take note of the said situation and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. 8. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this criminal misc. petition. The same is, therefore, dismissed.Stay petition also stands dismissed.Petition Dismissed. 8. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this criminal misc. petition. The same is, therefore, dismissed.Stay petition also stands dismissed.Petition Dismissed. *******