[2025:RJ-JP:1672] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7370/2024 Mahesh Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramnarayan Sharma, Mehant R/o Kale Hanuman Ji Ka Mandir, Amer Road, Police Station Brahampuri, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Radhamohan Agarwal S/o Late Shri Kalyanmal Agarwal, Aged About 76 Years, R/o B-61, Saket Colony, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 10/01/2025 1. By way of filing of the instant misc. petition, a challenge has been made to the impugned order dated 10.07.2024 passed by the Special Metropolitan Magistrate (N.I. Act) No.5, Jaipur Metropolitan-II. By way of filing of an application, by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for summoning the complainant for the purpose of his cross-examination has been rejected. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is facing trial for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘Act of 1881”) before the Trial Court. Counsel submits that the opportunity of cross-examination with the complainant was closed by the Trial Court vide order dated 10.07.2024. Counsel submits that the petitioner was [2025:RJ-JP:1672] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7370/2024] suffering from several ailments, hence, he could not file the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for summoning the complainant for the purpose of his cross-examination and now when the said application was submitted, the same has been rejected by the impugned order. 3. Counsel submits that cross-examination is a statutory right of an accused in a fair trial from which the petitioner has been deprived, therefore, last opportunity be granted to the petitioner subject to payment of cost to the complainant. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Perusal of the record indicates that the complainant has filed a criminal complaint against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Act of 1881, in the year 2009, and several opportunities were granted to the petitioner for the purpose of cross-examination but the petitioner has failed to avail all the opportunities, hence, the Trial Court has closed the opportunity of cross-examination vide order dated 10.07.2024, thereafter, the petitioner remained silent for a period of more than one and a half year and then, an application was submitted by him under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for summoning the complainant for the purpose of his cross- examination. It appears that the object of the petitioner was only to delay disposal of the complaint that is why the opportunity of cross-examination was not availed by him but at the same time, this Court cannot ignore the material aspect of the matter that cross-examination is the right of an accused in a fair trial. Hence, under these circumstances, last opportunity is granted to the [2025:RJ-JP:1672] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7370/2024] petitioner subject to payment of cost of Rs. 25,000/- to the complainant before the next date posted before the Trial Court. 6. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to make the payment of cost amount to the complainant before the next date and he further fails to cross-examine the complainant on the next date, no further opportunity would be granted to the petitioner. 7. In view of above, the criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. 8. Stay application as well as all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 9. This order has been passed by this Court without issuing notice to the complainant in order to avoid further delay in disposal of the complaint which is lying pending for adjudication since 2009. In case, the complainant feels aggrieved by the instant ex parte order, he would be at liberty to move an application for recalling of this order by way of filing of an appropriate application. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Garima/136