HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7594/2019 Shivdayal Sharma S/o Shri Hardayal Sharma, aged about 58 Years, R/o Plot No.11, Madhu Nagar Colony, Harmada, District Jaipur, Raj. ----Petitioner/Non-complainant Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, through PP. 2. Gopal Krishna Sharma S/o Shri Mool Chand Sharma, R/o C-98, Bassi Sitarampura, Panipech, Jhotwara Road, Jaipur, Raj. ----Respondents/Complainant For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr.Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 01/04/2026 1. By way of filing the instant petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 09.04.2019 passed by the Special Metropolitan Magistrate (N.I Act Cases) No. 1, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur by which the opportunity of the accused-petitioner to cross- examine the complainant-respondent has been closed. 2. None has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. But looking to the fact that this petition is lying pending before this Court since 2019, i.e., last more than seven years, this Court deems it just and proper to look into the contents and the grounds of the instant petition and decide the same on its merits. 3. Perusal of the contents of the instant petition indicates that the accused-petitioner is facing trial for the offence under Section (2 of 4) [CRLMP-7594/2019] 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the Court of Special Metropolitan Magistrate (N.I Act Cases) No. 1, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur since 2013. It appears that when the case was listed on the fateful day, i.e., on 09.04.2019, a request was made by counsel for the accused-petitioner before the Trial Court at 04:25 PM showing his inability to complete the cross-examination and he sought time to cross-examine the complainant-respondent on some other day. The aforesaid prayer of the counsel for the accused-petitioner was not accepted and the opportunity of the accused to cross-examine the complainant was closed. 4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the instant petition. 5. Perusal of the petition indicates that a complaint has been filed against the accused-petitioner in the year 2013 and after recording the statement of the complainant-respondent against the accused, sufficient opportunities were granted to the accused- petitioner of cross-examination of the complainant-respondent. It appears that all those opportunities were not availed by the accused-petitioner and on every occasion, time was sought, hence, the case was deferred for one date to another and on the fateful day, when the case was listed before the Court below on 09.04.2019, the same request was made by counsel for the accused-petitioner at 04:25PM, when only five minutes were left, under these circumstances, the Trial Court could have posted the matter for some other day, instead of closing the opportunity of the accused-petitioner for cross-examination of the complainant- respondent. (3 of 4) [CRLMP-7594/2019] 6. (3 of 4) [CRLMP-7594/2019] 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant petition with the following terms and conditions:- (I) The petitioner would pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent-complainant within a period of three weeks from today. (II) The petitioner would plant 25 shade bearing trees in his vicinity in public area. The aforesaid process would be carried out by him within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and he is further directed to look after these shade bearing trees till they get in proper shape. (III) The petitioner would submit the photographs of these shade bearing trees along-with an undertaking before the trial Court to show that the Condition No.II imposed by this Court has been duly complied with by him and he would take care of these plants till it grows and gets in proper shape and they would submit the actual photographs of these trees at the end of every three months in every year till disposal of the case. 8. The reasons for passing this present order directing the petitioner to plant 25 shade bearing trees is in the interest of the public at large and for the greater public good. Planting trees as directed above, is one such initiative, which this Court considers to be appropriate, as trees, for as long as they thrive whether for decades or centuries will continuously and silently offer numerous benefits to the city and the surrounding community. Future (4 of 4) [CRLMP-7594/2019] generations will benefit from a cleaner, fresh and oxygen-rich environment. 9. In case, the petitioner complies with the aforesaid conditions within the above stipulated period, one last and final opportunity shall be granted to the accused-petitioner by the Trial Court to cross-examine the complainant-respondent by fixing a short date and in case, due to paucity of time, the cross-examination is not completed on the said date, then a subsequent short date be fixed for the said purpose. 10. In case, the accused-petitioner fails to avail the aforesaid opportunity to cross-examine the complainant-respondents on the next date, no further opportunity shall be granted to him for the aforesaid purpose and the Trial Court would be at liberty to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. 11. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the criminal misc. petition, stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) stand disposed of. 12. This order will have its effect only in case, the complaint is still lying pending and this order will not have any effect, in case, the complaint has already been decided by the Trial Court. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /30