JUDGMENT :

A.M. Badar, J.

1. All these applications can be decided conveniently by this common judgment as prayers made in all these petitions are identical but for the prayers made in Criminal Application bearing No. 261 of 2020.

2. By these applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C. for the sake of brevity), applicants/original accused are praying for quashing and setting aside the order dated 28th January 2020 passed in subject criminal causes by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 20th Court, Mazgaon, Mumbai, whereby applications filed by respondent No. 2 herein/original complainant for quashing of trial of twelve complaint cases for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act came to be allowed and after closure of re-trial, the learned trial Magistrate was pleased to direct the original complainant/respondent No. 2 herein to take necessary steps for issuing conviction warrants against the original accused/applicants herein. In Criminal Application No. 261 of 2020, in addition to challenging the order dated 28th January 2020 directing closure of trial, the applicants/original accused are also praying for quashing and setting aside orders dated 8th November 2019 and 23rd November 2019 whereby the learned trial Magistrate had passed no-cross order so far as PW1 is concerned and rejected to recall the PW1. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred to in their original capacity.

3. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.

4. Facts-necessary for deciding the present applications can be summarized thus:

(a) Way back in the year 1997, complainant preferred complaints for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that cheques for Rs. 5 lakh issued for satisfaction of legally enforceable debt by accused persons came to be dishonoured. During pendency of those complaints, they came to be dismissed in the year 2013 and then were restored in the year 2014. Subsequently, accused persons failed to appear before the learned trial Magistrate. Instead of taking steps for securing presence of accused persons, the learned trial Magistrate proceeded ex parte in those criminal complaints. Evidence affidavit came to be accepted. No statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. came to be recorded and ultimately, in absence of accused persons, they came to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and were sentenced accordingly.

(b) Dissatisfied with the conviction and the resultant sentence, accused persons preferred individual appeals before the learned Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, and those appeals came to be allowed on 25th January 2019. For the sake of convenience, operative portion of one order from the appeal is reproduced hereunder. It reads thus:

"ORDER

1. Criminal Appeal No. 763/15 is allowed on depositing cost of Rs. 50,000/- which is to be deposited by the appellant on or before 01.02.2019, which shall be payable to the respondent No. 1.

2. If the appellants fails to deposit the amount of cost within stipulated period the appeal shall be treated as dismissed.

3. On depositing the cost by the appellant the order passed by the learned Magistrate, shall be quashed and set aside and the matter shall be remanded to the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for trial afresh from the stage of cross-examining the complainant and his witness, if any.

4. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Magistrate on 08.02.2019 at 11.00 sharp.

5. The learned Magistrate need not to issue notices to the parties.

6. He shall see that the matter is disposed of on or before 08.03.2019, if the appellant fails to extent co-operation for expeditious disposal of the matter in that case, he shall not hesitate to proceed further with the matter."

(c) Accused persons, feeling aggrieved by imposition of costs of Rs. 50,000/-