Interim Order 3

Order Details: Copy of Document.
Pdf Text: 6 C.C.No.1209/SS/2018
CW-1 Exh.05
16. 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 : 19.12.2023 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
Cross examination of CW-01- Rajendra Khatanhar by advocate Mr.
Rajesh Jain for the accused :
17. I am studied upto 10th Standard. I was dealer of petroleum
products. In the mean while I was dealing in property business but it
was closed due to loss. At present I am doing nothing. It is true to say
that except these two businesses I was not doing any other business. I
was running both business as a sole proprietor. I know the accused
No.2 Birju Murjani since last 45 years. It is true to say that I have not
done any business with the accused No.1 and 2. It is true to say that I
have not produced any document in respect of legal entity of accused
No.1 or business of accused No.2. It is true to say that I have not
produced any document to show relationship in between accused No.1
and accused No.2. It is not true to say that I am not aware whether
accused No.1 firm is registered firm or not. The accused No.1 firm is
registered partnership firm. It is true to say that I do not possess any
document to show that the accused No.1 firm is registered partnership
firm. It is not true to say that I am saying that partnership firm is
registered firm as per my assumption. There are only two partners of
the firm at present. I was knowing since beginning that there were two
partners of the partnership firm accused No.1. I can tell the name of
another partner of accused No.1. At present I do not recollect his name
-- 1 of 7 --
7 C.C.No.1209/SS/2018
CW-1 Exh.05
but I know him. I again say that his name Chandan Prem Rizwani. I
have not added him as co-accused in present case because whole and
sole is Mr. Birju Murjani accused No.2. It is not true to say that I have
purposely stated that accused No.2 was looking entire business. It is not
true to say that I have not impleaded another partner Chandan Rizwani
to favour him. It is not true to say that in present case the accused No.2
has no role but I have falsely implicated him. It is not true to say that I
have purposely filed false complaint against accused No.2.
Cross examination deferred till next date as court recess
time.
R.O.A.C.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 19.12.2023 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code :MH01362
Date 02.04.2024
Resumed on Oath:
Further cross examination of CW-01- Rajendra Khatanhar by advocate
Mr. Rajesh Jain for the accused :
18. It is true to say that as per narration of my complaint I
have advanced a friendly loan to the accused without interest. It is true
to say that the firm of accused used to pay some amount of money on
every month to me. Witness volunteers that said amount was amount
of interest. It is not true to say that whatever amount given to me was
for the repayment of principle loan amount. It is not true to say that
there is no agreed transaction for giving interest in between me and
accused. Witness volunteers that accused had agreed to pay interest in
writing. It is true to say that I have not produced any such document on
-- 2 of 7 --
8 C.C.No.1209/SS/2018
CW-1 Exh.05
record. It is not true to say that I can not assign any reason for not
producing the same. It might be my mistake of not producing it. I can
produce it on record. I was getting approximately Rs.22,000/- per
month from the firm of accused every month. I got said amount
approximately for one year only. I can not tell exact amount received by
me.
19. It is true to say that nothing is mentioned about payment
of interest in Bill of Exchange Exh.22 now shown to me. It is true to say
that I have not made my signature on Bill of Exchange Exh.22 for
acceptance. It is true to say that the Bill of Exchange Exh.22 is not
prepared in my presence. It is true to say that I can not tell who has
signed the document. It is not true to say that I have produced false
and forged Bill of Exchange Exh.22. It is not true to say that accused
have not signed the Bill of Exchange. It is not true to say that cheque
Exh.18 to 21 is not signed in my presence. It is true to say that I have
not issued any notice to the accused after 01.06.2018. It is not true to
say that I have filed false and bogus notice dated 31.05.2018 produced
at Exh.24. It is not true to say that notice Exh.24 was not prepared as
per my instructions. It is not true to say that I have not sent any
demand notice under section 138(b) of Negotiable Instrument Act, to
the accused. It is not true to say that accused is not liable to pay the
cheque amount.
20. I know Mr. Sonawane who was working with the accused
earlier. I will try to summon him as a witness. It is true to say that he
can depose the true facts. It is not true to say that I have stolen the
cheque from the accused in connivance with Mr. Sonawane. I do not
know whether Sonawane was removed from service on knowing said
-- 3 of 7 --
9 C.C.No.1209/SS/2018
CW-1 Exh.05
fact by the accused. It is not true to say that the cheque is not signed by
the accused. It is not true to say that accused has not received any
notice. It is not true to say that I have filed false case against the
accused. It is not true to say that accused is not liable to pay any
amount to me. It is not true to say that the contents of complaint and
affidavit in lieu of examination in chief are false. It is not true to say
that I have deliberately not mentioned the money received by me in
notice, complaint and affidavit of evidence.
On oral request of the advocate for the accused cross
examination is deferred till next date.
R.O.A.C.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 02.04.2024 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code :MH01362
-- 4 of 7 --
10 C.C.No.1209/SS/2018
CW-1 Exh.05
Date : 08.10.2024
Resumed on S.A. after setting aside no cross order.
Further cross examination of CW-01- Rajendra Khatanhar by advocate
Mr. Rajesh Jain for the accused :
21. I have shown the payments received in my Ledger Account.
It is true to say that I have not produced the Ledger Statement.
22. I have not given money to any other person than the
accused as a financial help. I am not possessing Money Lending
Licence. I am not a professional money lender. I do not know that
giving money on interest without licence is illegal and banned by law. It
is true to say that I have not executed any Agreement at the time of
giving or taking money. It is true to say that I have not given anything
in writing to the accused for the money received by me from him
specifying the money against interest or money against principle time
to time.
23. It is true to say that I had not gone to the home of the
accused personally before giving loan to him. It is true to say that even
after giving alleged loan, I never visited the house of accused. I had
given all the papers to my advocate prior to issuing notice to the
accused. It is not true to say that I had not given the cheque return
memo of the bank to my advocate. It is not true to say that I have not
read contents of notice. It is not true to say that my advocate has issued
notice without my instructions. It is not true to say that notice Exh.24
dated 31.05.2018 was never sent by me or my advocate to the accused.
It is not true to say that I have produced false statutory demand notice
dated 31.05.2018. It is not true to say that I had not made any
correspondence with the accused prior to receiving alleged cheques. I
had sent E-mail. It is true to say that I have not produced said E-mail
-- 5 of 7 --
11 C.C.No.1209/SS/2018
CW-1 Exh.05
on record. It is not true to say that I am deposing false that I had sent
E-mail to the accused. It is not true to say that I have filed false notice,
complaint and evidence affidavit. It is not true to say that I have filed
false documents in the complaint. It is not true to say that accused has
never issued the cheques under his signature to me. It is not true to say
that I have written the contents of the cheques falsely. It is true to say
that accused personally has not filled the contents of the cheque.
Witness states that the contents were written by his staff member. It is
not true to say that I have produced false cheque return memos. It is
not true to say that I have filed false and bogus complainant against the
accused. It is not true to say that accused has no liability to pay any
amount. It is not true to say that I filed false complaint to harass the
accused. It is not true to say that I have mentioned false amount on the
cheques and no such liability occurs towards the accused.
Cross examination is over.
No Re-examination.
R.O.A.C.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 08.10.2024 Judicial Magistrate(First Class),
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code :MH01362
-- 6 of 7 --
12 C.C.No.1209/SS/2018
CW-1 Exh.05
CERTIFICATE
I affirm that the contents of this P.D.F. file evidence are same, word to word as per
the original evidence.
Name of Stenographer : Mrs. Aditi Ravikiran Dalvi
Court : Judicial Magistrate(First Class), 58th Court,
Bandra, Mumbai.
Dictated in open court on : 08.10.2024.
Typed on : 08.10.2024.
Evidence printed and Signed on : 08.10.2024.
Order Uploaded on : 08.10.2024.
-- 7 of 7 --