[2025:RJ-JP:1476] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8475/2024 Aradhya Marketing, Through Authorised Signatory and Proprietor Khemsingh R/o C-72, Jaswantnagar, Singh Bhoomi, Khatipura Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus Kasaka Metals, Trough Proprietor Poonam Khandelwal Adress L- 60, Jhotwara Ricco Industrial Area, Through Power Of Attorney Holder Vimal Kumar Gupta. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yunus Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. J.S.Rathore-PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 09/01/2025 1. The instant criminal misc. petition has been preferred against the impugned order dated 14.11.2024 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No. 1, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, by which the application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner for summoning the complainant for the purpose of his cross-examination has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is facing trial for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Counsel submits that though some opportunities were granted to the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant but for one reason or another, he could not be cross-examined, and his opportunity of cross examination was closed on 22.07.2024. Counsel submits that thereafter, an application was submitted on [2025:RJ-JP:1476] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-8475/2024] 10.10.2024 seeking a direction for summoning of the aforesaid witness for the purpose of cross examination but the same has been rejected. Counsel submits that cross-examination is a statutory right of an accused for conducting a fair trial against him. Counsel submits that if the petitioner is deprived of the aforesaid opportunity, he could not be in a possession to put his defence in a proper way, hence, under these circumstances, last opportunity be granted to the petitioner, subject to payment of appropriate amount of cost to the complainant. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 4. Perusal of the record indicates that a criminal complaint against the petitioner is pending before the Trial Court since 2018 and more than eight opportunities were granted to the petitioner for the purpose of cross examination but he could not avail the same and the case was deferred for one reason or another, ultimately, his cross examination was closed by the Trial Court on 22.07.2024. The Trial Court has not committed any error in closing such opportunity of the petitioner but at this time, this Court cannot lose sight of this fact that cross-examination is a statutory right of an accused in fair trial, in case, such opportunity is not granted to the petitioner, the case would be decided adversely against him. 5. In the interest of justice, one last opportunity is granted to the petitioner to cross examine the complainant on the next date with the cost amount of Rs. 15000/-. The petitioner is directed to pay the cost amount to the complainant on or before the next date. In case, the petitioner fails to pay the cost amount to the [2025:RJ-JP:1476] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-8475/2024] complainant on or before the next date and in case, he fails to cross examine on the next date, further opportunity would not be granted to the petitioner for the said purpose. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. 7. This ex parte order has been passed without issuing notice to the complainant in order to avoid further delay in disposal of the complaint filed by the complainant, which is lying pending for adjudication since 2018. In case, the petitioner feels aggrieved by this order, he would be at liberty to move application for recalling of this order. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/128