Order 3

Order Details: Order Below EX 1
Pdf Text: 11 C.C.No.1168/SS/2018
CW-01 Exh.24
18. Whatever stated by me in my evidence affidavit is true and
correct and in token thereof I have signed the affidavit.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 28.01.2026 Judicial Magistrate(First Class),
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
Cross examination of CW-01 Mr. Sorabh Murarilal Gupta by advocate
Milind Gaware for accused after recalling witness :
19. I have done masters in Science. In the year 2016-2017 my source
of income was from Private Consulting to the organization. During said
period I was working at Mumbai and I was residing at Bandra at Seagull
Apartment, Off Carter Road, Bandra(W), Mumbai. I was staying alone. In
the year 2016 Mr. Murarilal Gupta was staying at Goregaon (W). It is true
to say that my mother Sudha was also staying with him at Goregaon. It is
true to say that at that time she was housewife. It is not true to say that
she had no source of income at that time. It is true to say that in the
transaction of accused with Murarilal Gupta, Smt. Sudha Gupta had not
played any role. It is true to say that in the year 2016 Smt. Sudhaji had
not executed any document in respect of transaction in between Murarilal
and accused. It is true to say that in the year 2016 I have also not
executed any document alongwith my father with the accused. It is not
true to say that at that time I was not involved in any transaction in
between Mr. Murarilal and accused. I have a document to show that I was
involved in the transaction in between Mr. Murarilal and accused in the
year 2016. There are number of transactions of my father and mother
since year 2012 wherein I am involved. I can not tell the number of
transactions wherein my mother was involved.
20. I have submitted original Power of Attorney at Exh.26. My mother
had asked me to prepare the Power of Attorney. At the time of executing
-- 1 of 5 --
12 C.C.No.1168/SS/2018
CW-01 Exh.24
Power of Attorney, it was discussed that legal action is to be taken against
the accused. My mother has filed another case against Dhiren Sampat. My
mother has not filed any other case against accused except the two cases
in my knowledge. It is true to say that the Power of Attorney nowhere
states specifically about giving powers to file litigation against accused or
specifically complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act.
My mother is old and as such she could not remain present personally
before the court. It is not true to say that I do not have legal right to file
case against accused on the basis present Power of Attorney.
21. The amount of Rs.34 lakhs was given to the accused on various
dates. It is true to say that I can not tell various dates. Now I am shown
Loan Confirmation Letter Exh.27. Rs.34 lakhs was given on 29.12.2016.
Said amount was given by way of bank transfer mode. It is true to say that
I have not produced any document as to RTGS, NEFT etc. to show parting
an amount of Rs.34 lakhs on 29.12.2016 to the accused. I can produce it. I
will have to check the record from which bank the money is transferred.
Said amount was given on interest @ 11% to 15% per annum.
22. Now I am referred para 2 of my affidavit in lieu of examination in
chief. It is correct to say that I have stated in said para, “That I am
conversant and familiar with the facts and record relating to the
transaction as I was personally present and dealt with the accused”. Said
portion is marked as Portion mark ‘A’ in evidence affidavit for the purpose
of omissions and contradictions. It is true to say that the contents of
complaint Exh.01 were also reproduced as per my narration. I had
narrated said contents of portion mark ‘A’ to my advocate while drafting
complaint. I can not assign any reason as to why said contents of portion
mark ‘A’ are absent in my complaint. It is not true to say that I have stated
said facts in my evidence affidavit deliberately after thought and made
-- 2 of 5 --
13 C.C.No.1168/SS/2018
CW-01 Exh.24
improvement.
23. Now I am referred para 3 of my affidavit in lieu of examination in
chief. It is correct to say that I have stated in said para, “Pursuant to the
request made by accused from time to time Murarilal Gupta had advanced
an aggregate amount of Rs.34,00,000/- by cheques to the accused”. Said
portion is marked as Portion mark ‘B’ in evidence affidavit for the purpose
of omissions and contradictions. I do not remember whether I had stated
or not to my advocate while drafting complaint that said amount was paid
by cheques. I can not assign any reason as to why in my complaint the
mode of payment by cheque is not mentioned.
24. Now I am referred para 10 of my affidavit in lieu of examination in
chief. It is correct to say that I have stated in said para, “I was present
when the complainant gave instructions to the advocate for sending
notice.” Said portion is marked as Portion mark ‘D’ in evidence affidavit
for the purpose of omissions and contradictions. It is true to say that said
contents are absent in my complaint. I can not assign any reason why the
same is absent in my complaint.
25. I had given instructions to my advocate for drafting demand notice
dated 18.12.2017 produced at Exh.17. It is true to say that on said date
my mother had not given me any Power of Attorney.
26. I don’t want to submit any more documents in proceeding. It is
true to say that I have not made averments in my demand notice Exh.17
and complaint Exh.01 in respect of documents referred by me in para
No.5, 6, 7, 8 of my Examination in Chief that is original demand
Promissory Note, Loan Receipt, Undertaking Letter etc. On the date of
issuing notice that on 18.12.2017 all above referred documents were in
my custody. I had shown said documents to my advocate. I have not asked
-- 3 of 5 --
14 C.C.No.1168/SS/2018
CW-01 Exh.24
him as to why he has not mentioned about said documents in my demand
notice.
27. I have brought with me document showing liability of Rs.34 lakhs
against the accused. I again say that I have not brought any document. I
do not know how many bank accounts were maintained by Mr. Murarilal
Gupta in the year 2015-2016. He had shown the amount receivable by
the accused in the Income Tax Returns. He had shown said outstanding
amount towards accused in the Income Tax Returns submitted for the
Assessment year 2016-2017. He died on 20.02.2017. I do not know
whether Smt. Sudha Gupta was filing Income Tax Returns in the year
2017. I will have to check my mother Smt. Sudha Gupta and myself had
applied or not for getting Succession Certificate. It is true to say that
before death Mr. Murarilal Gupta had not given any letter denoting and
asking to recover particular amount from the accused. It is true to say
that my father was not possessing Money Lending Licence. It is true to
say that my mother is also not possessing Money Lending Licence. It is
not true to say that my father was doing illegal money lending business of
giving loan on interest. It is true to say that my mother might not be
aware if any cash transaction had taken place in between my father and
accused. It is true to say that my father was in custody of numerous of
cheques of accused. I am not aware that my father has not returned his
cheques. I do not know my mother has also not returned his cheques. I
have not verified with my record as to how many cheques of accused are
in custody of my mother. It is not true to say that the cheque Exh.15 was
also given to my father previously by the accused. It is true to say that
there is difference of ink of signature and ink of other contents on cheque
Exh.15. It is true to say that even hand writing as to the name of payee,
amount etc. is different than the signature on cheque Exh.15. It is not
-- 4 of 5 --
15 C.C.No.1168/SS/2018
CW-01 Exh.24
true to say that I have filled in cheque Exh.15. It is not true to say that I
have prepared all the documents produced at Exh.27 to 37. It is not true
to say that accused had given his signatures on blank papers time to time.
It is not true to say that I have forged and prepared false documents on
said blank papers signed by the accused. I will produce the bank statement
on next date.
Cross examination deferred till next date on oral request of
advocate for accused.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 28.01.2026 Judicial Magistrate(First Class),
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code :MH01362
-- 5 of 5 --