JUDGMENT Sanjay Karol, A.C.J. - Petitioner Ram Lal is aggrieved of the dismissal of his application, so filed under the provisions of section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking to recall and re-examine the complainant. 2. H.P. State Cooperative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank (hereinafter referred to as complainant) initiated proceedings, under the provisions of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against Ram Lal. Cheque (Ex.CW-1/B), on presentation, was not honoured. Notice calling upon the loanee to repay the amount of loan was also issued. Complainant led evidence in support of the complaint. After the evidence of the complainant was over, loanee tried to set up a defence of the cheque issued to the complainant was for the purpose of security and not towards repayment of the amount of loan. 3. The reason for recalling the complainant for further cross-examination, that petitioner could not instruct his counsel properly, appears to be an afterthought and not true, if not false. Petitioner is an educated person. He is not a rustic villager. Since beginning he was represented by a counsel. The matter was adjourned thrice only to enable the petitioner to instruct his counsel for cross-examining the complainant. 4. As such, this Court is of the considered view that the application was totally misconceived, so also this petition, which only merits rejection. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. 5. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.