[2025:RJ-JP:10714] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7850/2023 Mithoon S/o Shri Jaswant, R/o - Village And Post- Banipur Distt Rewadi, Haryana ----Petitioner Versus Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Gopinath Tiwari, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Plot No. 130, Pankhe Wali Gali, Shilp Colony, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Raj. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Shobha Sharma on behalf of Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Gadwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 10/03/2025 1. This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a challenge to the order dated 28.04.2023 as well as the order dated 03.08.2023 passed by the Court of Pilot Study Special Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act Cases) Jaipur Metropolitan-I in Criminal Case No.1022/2022 (159/2018, 8684/2018, 747/2022), whereby, the application filed by the accused-petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. for allowing him an opportunity to lead defense evidence was dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vishal Yadav vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Criminal Misc. (Petition) No.2931/2018) decided on 12.09.2018. [2025:RJ-JP:10714] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-7850/2023] 3. Heard. Considered the submissions made at bar and also perused the material available on record. 4. The facts borne out from the pleadings and the record are that the complainant-respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as regards the cheque No.213001 dated 05.08.2017 amounting to Rs.8,00,000/-, of Yash Bank Limited, Branch Bawal, Karnal, Haryana. 5. The complaint was filed in the year 2018. The recording of the evidence of the complainant was completed prior to 19.07.2022 and since the proceedings of the case were held up as the accused-petitioner was not appearing before the trial Court on due dates and therefore, his bail bonds were forfeited. However, the accused-petitioner has surrendered before the learned trial Court and the trial Court vide its order dated 19.07.2022 allowed him to be enlarged on bail. 6. The statements of the accused-petitioner under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded on 19.07.2022 and he prayed for an opportunity to submit the defense evidence. When the petitioner failed to submit the defense evidence, the opportunity to lead defense evidence was closed vide order dated 28.04.2023. After closure of the opportunity to produce the defense evidence on 28.04.2023, the petitioner moved an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. on 02.08.2023 for allowing him an opportunity to lead the defense evidence. The said application was filed after about four months. [2025:RJ-JP:10714] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-7850/2023] 7. The application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for allowing an opportunity to lead the defense evidence was dismissed on 03.08.2023. 8. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 03.08.2023 by way of present criminal misc. petition which was filed on 11.12.2023 i.e. after more than four months of the dismissal of the application. 9. The conduct of the petitioner as is discernible from the facts on record is that of intention to delay the case proceedings pending against him since 2018. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant-respondent submits that the case is posted for final arguments. 11. After going through the said judgment placed before this Court by the counsel for the petitioner, this Court finds that the facts of the referred case are quite different from the facts of the present case, hence, the concerned judgment is not applicable to the present case. 12. Taking into consideration the overall facts & circumstances of the case and more particularly the fact that the complaint filed against the petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is pending since 2018 and is posted for final arguments and also taking into consideration the conduct of the accused-petitioner during the case proceedings, this Court is not inclined to allow any further time to the petitioner to lead the defense evidence. 13. Accordingly, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed. 14. While dismissing this criminal misc. petition, this Court is also conscious of the fact that during the case proceedings, the petitioner has failed to appear before the trial Court and therefore, [2025:RJ-JP:10714] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-7850/2023] his bail bonds were forfeited and on his appearance before the learned trial Court on 19.07.2022, he was enlarged on bail and the proceedings against him, ordered under 446 Cr.P.C. were also dropped. 15. Since the main petition has been dismissed, the stay application as well as pending application/s, if any, also stand disposed of. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar/Satyendra/44