JUDGMENT

SURENDRA PANDHARINATH TAVADE,J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner is challenging the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patoda, District Beed in Summary Criminal Case No. 477 of 2010 dated 26th August, 2019, whereby respondent No.2 is allowed to re-examine himself to prove the document mentioned in the application.

3. It is contended that the trial Court has not considered the provision of Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and wrongly allowed the application. It is contended that respondent No.2 has fled criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner on 16.10.2010. Thereafter, respondent No.2 fled affidavit of evidence on 24.02.2012. He was cross-examined by the petitioner. Thereafter, he adduced evidence of his witnesses on 20th April 2013. It is also contended that respondent No.2 has fled pursis for closing of evidence. Thereafter, he submitted applications for examination of Bank officers. The said applications came to be allowed. Thereafter, respondent No.2 has also called Manager of State Bank of India, Patod