Order 2

Order Details: Copy of Document.
Pdf Text: 8 C.C.No.743/SC/2022
CW-01 Exh.17
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 : 05.03.2025 Judicial Magistrate(First Class),
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
Cross examination of CW-01 Pinki Dinesh Jadhav by advocate Ms.
Zarina Raeen for the accused :
19. I am graduate in Commerce. I know to read and write
English. I have gone through contents of my affidavit in lieu of
Examination in Chief. My occupation is business. I am taking home
tuition since year 2009. I am also doing business of Tiffin Service since
year 2011-2012. I am earning approximately Rs.25,000/- per month
from tuition business and Rs.12,000/- from tiffin service. My husband
is serving in BMC.
20. I know the accused through my husband since year 2009.
Accused has not directly demanded financial help to me. She
approached to my husband. She approached in the month of August,
2021. My husband has helped accused previously. He had given
Rs.1,50,000/- to the accused in the year 2014. Said amount was given
in cash to the accused by my husband. Accused repaid said amount till
2022 in parts. I paid again in the year 2021 to the accused despite she
was returning earlier amount given by me husband due to reason of
suffering from Cancer by the accused. I paid Rs.3 lakhs to the accused
in the month of August 2021. I did not pay said amount in presence of
any witness. I have not obtained any receipt in acknowledgment of
payment made to her. Witness states that she had given me cheque of
Rs.3 lakhs. The cheque Exh.19 was given to me on the same day when I
-- 1 of 2 --
9 C.C.No.743/SC/2022
CW-01 Exh.17
gave her Rs.3 lakhs. The contents of cheque were already written. The
accused brought the cheque with pre-written contents. It is not true to
say that the cheque was blank and with only signature of accused. It is
not true to say that the contents of the cheque as to the name of payee,
amount in words and figure and date is filled by me. It is not true to
say that the cheque was given against security and not in discharge of
repayment of loan amount. It is true to say that the ink as to the
contents of the cheque Exh.19 and ink of signature of the accused on
the cheque is different.
On oral request of the advocate for the accused cross
examination is deferred till next date.
R.O.A.C.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 05.03.2025 Judicial Magistrate(First Class),
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code :MH01362
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 : 05.03.2025.
Typed on : 05.03.2025.
Evidence printed and Signed on : 05.03.2025.
Order Uploaded on : 06.03.2025.
-- 2 of 2 --