( 1 ) THESE three revision petitions are directed against the impugned orders dated29. 4. 2004 and 1. 6. 2004 passedby the learned Trial Magistrate in three complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed by respondent No. 2 against the petitioners and others.

( 2 ) THE impugned orders dated 29. 4. 2004disposed of the petitioners applications under Section 294 of the Cr. P. C. for directing the complainant to admit or deny the documents being filed by the petitioners. These applications were rejected mainly on the ground that these had been moved at a belated stage and as such, were not maintainable. It was also observed that these applications had been moved in order to delay the trial of the cases.

( 3 ) CONSIDERING the history of the cases and the order sheets, a copy of which has been placed before this Court by learned Counsel for respondent No. 2, this court finds that the petitioners have been taking repeated adjournments and trying to delay the disposal of complaints. Vide orders dated 27. 3. 2004, the defence evidence of the petitioners was ordered to be dosed by the Trial Court. Upon filing of revision petitions, however, one more opp