CRL.M.C./9063/2024 of RABIA KIDWAI Vs THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+CRL.M.C. 9063/2024RABIA KIDWAIRABIA KIDWAI

.....Petitioner

Through:Mr. Prashant Kumar, Mr. SanjeevVerma, Mr. Jitender Kumar Singh,Ms. Nazia Parveen, Advs.Verma, Mr. Jitender Kumar Singh,Ms. Nazia Parveen, Advs.

versus

THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondent

Through:Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APPMr. Vikas Arora, Ms. Radhika Arora,Mr. Vishal Chaudhary, Advs. for R2Mr. Vikas Arora, Ms. Radhika Arora,Mr. Vishal Chaudhary, Advs. for R2

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R R%20.11.2024

CRL.M.A. 34748/2024

1.Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 9063/2024 & CRL.M.A. 34747/2024

1.This is petition filed under section 528 of Bharatiya NagarikSuraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’) seeking to set aside the order dated26.09.2024 passed by Ld. JMFC (NI-Act), Saket Court, Delhi whereby theLd. JMFC dismissed the application filed under Section 311 Code ofCriminal Procedure, 1973 to recall CW1 for further cross-examination.

2.The facts are that respondent no.2 filed complaint under section 138Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the petitioner wherein it wasstated that respondent no. 2 had given friendly loan of Rs 22 lakhs to thepetitioner.

3.In order to repay the said loan, the petitioner issued 4 cheques,however the said cheques were dishonoured. Aggrieved respondent no. 2

filed complaint under section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

4.Mr. Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the amount inquestion was deposited by respondent no.2 in company account where thepetitioner is director and not in the personal account of the petitioner.

5.The said fact was concealed by respondent no. 2 and could not beverified earlier. Hence, the petitioner had filed an application under Section311 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

6.Issue notice. Mr. Gautam, learned APP accepts notice on behalf ofrespondent No. 1 and Mr. Arora, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf ofrespondent No. 2

7.Mr. Arora, learned counsel while denying all the averments states thatwithout admitting any of the averments made in the petition, the petitionermaybe given one last and final opportunity to cross-examine CW1 subject topayment of costs.

8.Mr. Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to thesaid suggestion.

9.For the said reasons, the petition is allowed.

10.With consent of the parties, CW1 shall appear on 02.12.2024 beforethe appropriate court and will be cross-examined by the petitioner. Nofurther opportunity will be given to the petitioner to cross examine CW1.

11.The petitioner shall also pay sum of Rs. 35,000/- to the counsel forrespondent No. 2 on 02.12.2024 as costs.

12.The petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms.

NOVEMBER 20, 2024/sp

JASMEET SINGH, J