[2026:RJ-JP:31857] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4142/2026 CNR: RJHC020606502026 | URN: CRLMP / 9361U / 2026 Rajendra Kumar Sharma S/o Late Shri Shyamsundar Sharma, R/o House No. 234, Purohit Pada, Brahampuri, Jaipur And Presnetly Working At Govt. City Hospital, Bharamansheel Shalya Chikitsa Ikai, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Moti Dungari Road, Jaipur (Raj.). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent 2. Jugal Kishore S/o Shri Chhoti Lal, Aged About 63 Years, R/o House No. 1848, Jailal Munshi Ka Rasta, Chokdi Purani Basti, Chandpole Bazar, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Complainant/Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sogarwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 12/08/2026 1. By way of this instant Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 19.03.2025 passed by learned Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan-II in Cr. Reg. Case No.34918/2021 by which the petitioner's right to cross-examine the complainant was closed and against the order dated 16.02.2026 whereby application filed by the petitioner to re-open the right of the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant has been dismissed. [2026:RJ-JP:31857] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-4142/2026] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is facing criminal trial for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He submits that the learned trial Court had closed the cross examination of the complainant on 23.07.2024 and thereafter, the petitioner moved an application for opening the cross examination of the complainant on 23.09.2024. The learned trial Court allowed the application of the petitioner and fixed the matter for 19.03.2025, however, due to bonafide mistake and unavoidable circumstances, the counsel for the petitioner could not appear before the trial Court on 19.03.2025 and the trial Court vide impugned order dated 19.03.2025 again closed the evidence of complainant. Thereafter, on the same day, petitioner filed an application to re-open his right to cross- examine the complainant, which came to be dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 16.02.2026. Counsel submits that for just decision of the case, the cross-examination of the complainant is very essential and if prayer of the petitioner is not accepted and cross-examination of the complainant is not allowed to be conducted, the petitioner would not be able to defend his case properly and serious prejudice would be caused to him. He therefore, prays that in the interest of justice, the petitioner may be given one opportunity to cross-examine the complainant. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 4. Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case; considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and in the interest of justice, the petitioner is given [2026:RJ-JP:31857] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-4142/2026] one last opportunity to cross-examine the complainant subject to payment of cost to the complainant. 5. Accordingly, the instant Criminal Misc. petition is allowed and the impugned orders dated 19.03.2025 and 16.02.2026 passed by the trial Court are hereby quashed and set aside. The petitioner is granted one last opportunity to cross-examine the complainant subject to payment of cost of Rs.11,000/- to the complainant before the learned trial Court. The trial Court shall fix a date in the matter for the purpose of cross-examination of the complainant by the petitioner and shall summon the complainant accordingly. On that date, the petitioner shall make payment of cost to the complainant. 6. It is made clear that only one opportunity shall be given to the petitioner for the purpose of cross-examination of the complainant. In case, the petitioner does not make the payment of the cost to the complainant or fails to complete the cross- examination in one chance, as directed above, the present order shall lose its efficacy. 7. This Court is cautious of the fact that the present order has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the respondent/complainant, while keeping in mind that it may result in further delay in culmination of trial. If the respondent/complainant is dissatisfied with the present order or does not accept the cost imposed upon the petitioner by this Court, he would be at liberty to seek recall of this Court and in that eventuality, the learned trial Court shall not pass the final verdict. [2026:RJ-JP:31857] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-4142/2026] 8. The petitioner is directed to place a copy of this order before the trial Court for necessary compliance. 9. Considering the fact that the case has been pending since 2022 and upon acceptance of cost by the complainant as imposed by this order upon the petitioner, learned trial Court is requested to expedite the trial and make all endeavor to conclude the trial preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment in continuation of the proceedings. 10. Stay Application and pending application, if any, stand disposed of. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J 63/MADAN