Order 1

Order Details: Order
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
44TH COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
C.C.No.2949/SS/2018
Hema Dinesh Mehta, … Complainant
V/s
Umang Hospitality and Ors., … Accused
ORDER ON EXH.NO.19
1. At the fag end of the trial, the accused filed this application
under section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and thereby
prayed to recall the witness who was not cross examined during the
pandemic of Covid – 19. According to the accused, the transaction
involved in this matter is false and he has a good case to defend.
Hence, this application came to be filed.
2. On the other hand, the complainant opposed the application on
the ground that several opportunities were given for crossexamination
of the witness. But the accused adopted delay tactics and therefore, this
application is not tenable.
3. Having heard the learned advocates for both the sides, I perused
the record.
4. It is evident that when the case was fixed for crossexamination,
there was a surge of Covid19 and therefore, the witness could not be
crossexamined. But later on the accused ought to have filed the
application for recalling the witness. However, there is delay of about
-- 1 of 2 --
2
one year. Hence, considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion
by imposing appropriate cost the delay can be compensated. In short,
in order to have a fair trial this application needs to be allowed. Hence,
I pass the following order:
ORDER
1 The application is allowed subject to cost of Rs.5,000/ (Rupees
Five Thousand Only) payable to the complainant.
2 Issue summons to the complainant for crossexamination.
Sd/
( Sujitkumar C. Tayde )
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Date : 07.02.2024 44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 2 of 2 --