SURESH KAIT, J.

CRL.M.C. No.416/2016

1. Vide the present petition, the petitioners assailed the order dated 16.12.2015, whereby the application of the petitioners under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was dismissed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate.

2. In the said application, the petitioners have averred as under:-

“6. That however the accused has now been advised by his counsel that a cross examination of the complainant was not only his right but also a must in order to establish the fact that the complainant with full possession of all facts had agreed to the transaction with only one stipulation that is two blank security cheques were handed over to the complainant in order to ensure that the amount to be paid to the bank to release the mortgage was paid as intended. This fact is clearly illustrated by the fact that the cheques were only signed by the accused and no details were filled in by him and secondly by the fact that the accused could not have given a cheque for the interest amount calculated to the date.

7. That the accused states that unless the complainant is cross examined grave injustice and ir-repairable loss will be done to the accused who has already been c