1 14-wp-170-26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 170 OF 2026 Uday S/o Chandrashekhar Balapure Versus Kuber Corporation, A Partnership Firm through its Patner S.G.Zawar Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Shri U.S.Malte, Advocate for the petitioner through VC Shri V.M.Gadkari, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J. DATED : 20th AUGUST, 2026. The petitioner has approached this Court, challenging the order dated 05.01.2026 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.9, Akola below Exhibit 35 in Summary Criminal Case No. 1204 of 2023, whereby application filed by the accused, for calling of the bank statement of the complainant came to be rejected. 2. Office record shows that the notice was issued vide order 16.03.2026. However, the notice of respondent was awaited. Hence, one more opportunity was granted vide order dated 27.04.2026. As per the office note dated 05.05.2026, the respondent was duly served. SKNair 2 14-wp-170-26.odt Despite service, nobody appeared on behalf of the respondent. The matter was thereafter listed on several such occasions, however, nobody appeared on behalf of the respondent. 3. Today, when the matter was called nobody appeared on behalf of the respondent. The limited question which arises for consideration before this Court is whether the learned trial Court which has closed the matter for hearing at Exhibit 35 for order, had thereafter again heard the accused or his counsel at Exhibit 35 before passing the impugned order dated 05.01.2026, rejecting the application. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Shri Malte submits that rojnama dated 30.08.2025 would show that the petitioner/accused was heard on Exhibit 35 and the say of the complainant was called. The complainant has filed his say on 19.09.2025. Thereafter, the matter was posted for orders on the Exhibit 35 as could be reflected from the rojnama dated 19.09.2025, 29.09.2025, 18.10.2025, 27.10.2025 and 15.11.2025. Learned counsel Shri Malte further submits that since the matter was pending for orders on Exhibit 35 for a very long period, the matter was again kept for hearing on Exhibit 35, as could be noted in the rojnama dated 11.12.2025. Rojnama dated 11.12.2025 would show that SKNair 3 14-wp-170-26.odt the matter was specifically adjourned for hearing on Exhibit 35 to 05.01.2026. It is the submission of the learned counsel Shri Malte that on 05.01.2026, no such hearing on the application took place and suddenly an entry was noted in the rojnama that the order came to be passed on Exhibit 35 without a fresh hearing granted to the accused. The limited grievance raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner was not heard before passing order below Exhibit 35, which was specifically again kept for rehearing on 05.01.2026, as could be seen from the rojnama dated 11.12.2025. 5. I have gone through the impugned order dated 05.01.2026 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Akola. The perusal of the order shows that the application was filed by the petitioner, who is an accused in a criminal complaint case under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The application was filed below Exhibit 35 to call the bank statement of the complainant. The said application came to be rejected vide order dated 05.01.2026. 6. I have also gone through the rojnama dated 11.12.2025 which specifically records that the matter for hearing on Exhibit 35 on 05.01.2026. The rojnama dated 05.01.2026 thereafter directly record SKNair 4 14-wp-170-26.odt that the order on Exhibit 35 was already passed. Thus, there appears to be some substance in the submissions made by the learned counsel Shri Malte, that neither the accused nor his counsel was heard before passing the order on Exhibit 35 and directly an order came to be passed on 05.01.2026. The rojnama dated 11.12.2025 specifically records that the matter is again kept for hearing on Exhibit 35. However, no such hearing appears to have taken place. 7. Thus, without going into the merits of the order dated 05.01.2026, an opportunity can be granted to the petitioner to be heard by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Akola, by directing the trial Court to pass a fresh order only after hearing the petitioner. Hence, I am inclined to exercise the discretion under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the order which is passed without hearing the petitioner and pass the following order. ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. The impugned order dated 05.01.2026 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Akola below Exhibit 35 in Summary Criminal Case No. 1204 of 2023 is hereby quashed and set aside; SKNair 5 14-wp-170-26.odt iii. The matter is remanded back again to learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Akola. The petitioner shall appear before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Akola on 08.09.2026. iv. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Akola shall hear the accused/petitioner herein as well as complainant and thereafter pass a fresh order below Exhibit 35. v. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Akola shall make an endeavor to decide the application expeditiously and not beyond a period of three weeks from the date of appearance of the petitioner/accused and the complainant. 8. With these observations, the writ petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 9. Needless to mention that this Court has not decided the merits of the order 05.01.2026. Learned trial Court shall decide the application below Exhibit 35 on its own merits and without getting influenced by any observations made by this Court. [MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.] SKNair Signed by: Mr. S.K. NAIR Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 24/08/2026 20:14:35