JUDGMENT : 1. The complainant of Complaint Case No. 1169 of 2010 is aggrieved of the order dated 18.01.2017 passed in G.R No. 1169 of 2010 (T.R No. 599 of 2017) as well as order dated 22.06.2018 passed in Criminal Revision No. 11 of 2017 by which his application filed under section 311 Cr.P.C to prove the Advocate’s notice and Certificate of the Bank under section 146 of N.I Act has been dismissed. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceeding under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is a technical one and while so, in absence of the Advocate’s notice and the Bank’s Certificate the case may fail. 3. At the outset, it needs to be recorded that the application under section 311 Cr.P.C was filed by the complainant when the matter was posted for arguments; the complainant’s evidence was closed on 19.08.2013 and the defence evidence was closed on 29.09.2016. The petitioner has pleaded that due to talk of compromise between the parties necessary documents could not be filed by him during trial of Complaint Case No. 1169 of 2010. The aforesaid plea taken by the petitioner must fail. The petitioner who has examined five witnesses and on behalf of the accused two defence witnesses were examined cannot take refuse to the alleged talk of compromise between the parties. By now it is well-settled that the provision under section 311 Cr.P.C cannot be resorted to by the parties to fill-up lacuna in the case [refer, “Jamatraj Kewalji Govani Vs. State of Maharashtra” reported in AIR 1968 SC 178 ]. When the trial in Complaint Case No. 1169 of 2010 was nearing completion, it must be inferred that the parties were well-aware of the strength or weaknesses of their case. 4. In the above facts, finding no infirmity in the impugned orders dated 18.01.2017 and 22.06.2018, Cr.M.P No. 2512 of 2018 is dismissed.