940-WP-244-2025.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.244 OF 2025 Lotus Refineries Pvt Ltd ...Petitioners Through its Managing Director Arun Kumar Sharma & Anr. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents —————— Mr. Murtaza Najmi a/w Dilip Shukla, Farida Najmi, Nancy Kanungo, Kashish, Sutaja Bhule, Nasrah Ansari & Arefa Siddiquie, for the Petitioners. Mr. S. S. Ghag, APP, for the Respondent-State. Mr. Yashpal Thakur a/w Nimeet Sharma & Vinit Vaidya i/b MZM Legal LLP, for Respondent No.2. —————— Coram: Madhav J. Jamdar, J. Date: 24 September 2026 P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Najmi, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, Mr. Thakur, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 and Mr. Ghag, learned APP for the Respondent-State of Maharashtra. 2. In this Writ Petition, the challenge is to the legality and validity of the Order dated 24th December 2024 passed by the learned JMFC, 33rd Court, Ballard Pier at Mazgoan, Mumbai, below the application dated 24th December 2024 for issuance of witness summons in CC No.243/SS/2017. Arjun 1 ARJUN VITTHAL KUDHEKAR Digitally signed by ARJUN VITTHAL KUDHEKAR Date: 2026.09.24 20:50:43 +0530 940-WP-244-2025.doc 3. By the impugned Order, the said application has been rejected mainly on the ground that the application for issuance of witness summons to these six persons for examination as defence witnesses was for the purpose of bringing on record certain e-mails produced by Accused No.2. 4. However, Mr. Najmi, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, points out the cross-examination of DW-1-Arun Kumar Sharma. He submits that in the facts and circumstances, it has become necessary to examine the witnesses. He states that the Petitioners will examine only following two witnesses and not the six witnesses: i. Mr. Iqbal ii. Mr. Neeraj Upadhyay 5. In view of the said contentions raised by Mr. Najmi, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, Mr. Thakur, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.2, states that a learned Single Judge by Order dated 1st July 2024 passed in Criminal Writ Petition (Stamp) No.10663 of 2024, has expedited the hearing of the said case. He submits that, he has instructions that, if the Petitioners do not delay the trial on the ground of examination of these two witnesses and complete the examination of the said witnesses within a period of three weeks, then in that event, Respondent No.2 will have no objection to the examination of these two witnesses. Arjun 2 940-WP-244-2025.doc 6. Accordingly, by consent of the parties, the following Order is passed: i. The Order dated 24th December 2024 passed by the learned JMFC, 33rd Court, Ballard Pier at Mazgoan, Mumbai, below the application dated 24th December 2024 in CC No.243/SS/2017, is quashed and set aside to the following extent. ii. The Petitioners, i.e., Accused, are permitted to examine the following two witnesses. a) Mr. Iqbal b) Mr. Neeraj Upadhyay iii. The said exercise shall be completed on or before 21st October 2026. iv. The learned Trial Court is requested to conclude the hearing of said CC No.243/SS/2017 expeditiously. v. It is clarified that no further extension shall be sought by the Petitioners on any ground whatsoever for the examination of the above two witnesses. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. [Madhav J. Jamdar, J.] Arjun 3