V. B. GUPTA, J. ( 1 ) THIS petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr. P. C. against the impugned order dated 8th August, 2006 passed by Sh. Sunil Chaudhary, M. M. , New delhi in a complaint case. ( 2 ) ON 10th May, 2006, the complainant was examined and was put to the petitioner for cross-examination but the petitioner did not ask even a single question. ( 3 ) THEREAFTER, the petitioner moved an application under Section 311 cr. P. C. for recalling that witness. Vide impugned order, the learned Magistrate allowed the application of the petitioner and provided the opportunity to the petitioner to cross examine the complainant subject to the payment of Rs. 5,000/-as costs. ( 4 ) THE only grievance of the petitioner is that the costs imposed is very high and it should be reduced. ( 5 ) THE impugned order was passed on 8th August, 2006 whereas, the present petition has been filed in July, 2007, that is, more than 11 months, after passing of the impugned order. This clearly shows that the intention of the petitioner is to delay the trial which is pending in the trial court and to a certain extent he has succeeded in delaying the trial as the matter was fixed before the trial court on 30th August, 2006 for recording of statement of petitioner. ( 6 ) THE impugned order is admittedly in the favour of the petitioner, since the trial court has allowed the application of the petitioner under Section 311 cr. P. C. and as such I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order. ( 7 ) THE present petition is nothing but an abuse of process of law and has been filed only to delay the proceedings pending before the trial court. Thus, the present petition is most frivolous one and misconceived and same is dismissed with costs of Rs. 2,500/ -. ( 8 ) THE petitioner is directed to deposit the costs with the trial court within one month from the date of this order, failing which the trial court shall recover the same in accordance with law. ( 9 ) COPY of this judgment be sent to the trial court forthwith.