##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/16911/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026

0.10596788979298843

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 16911 of 2025 ================================================================

NEW RAJANI FARSAN MART THRO MAHENDRA PURANBHAI RAJANI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

================================================================

Appearance:

BHAVIN B THAKAR(9371) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 KARTIK H BHATT(9313) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR BHARGAV P DANGAR(10685) for the Respondent(s) No. 2

MR ADITYA JADEJA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ================================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA Date : 30/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Aggrieved and dissatisfied that the learned Trial Court had closed the right of the Accused to cross examine the complainant (of proceedings under section 138 of the N.I. Act), the petitioner has preferred the present proceedings, praying inter alia the following

reliefs:-

“A) Your Lordship may be pleased to quash and set aside a order passed below Ex.28 in Criminal Case No.2002of 2024 before Ld. Add. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Bhavnagar (ANNEXURE-B) AND further be pleased to allow a application filed by appellant below

Ex.28 dated 29.08.2025.

B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this Petition YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the order passed below Ex.28 in Criminal Case No.2002of 2024 before Ld. Add. Senior Civil Judge &

JMFC, Bhavnagar (ANNEXURE-B).

Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by MANOJ KR. RAI(HC01072) on Thu Apr 02 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 05 08:01:47 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/16911/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026

0.10596788979298843

C) Your Lordship may be pleased to pass any other and Further Orders as may be deemed fit and

proper.”

2. Rule. Learned advocate Mr. Bhavin B. Thakar fairly submits that pursuant to the complainant tendering a “Closing Pursis”, on 25.07.2025 the matter was posted at the stage of recording further statement of the accused, at which date, i.e. 25.07.2025, the accused was not

present before the Court.

3. Learned advocate does not dispute the fact that not only the accused was not present on 25.07.2025 but also

in many a subsequent occasions.

4. In the said circumstances, the learned Trial Court was pleased to schedule recording of “further statement” vide its order dated 28.08.2025. But on the very date i.e., on 29.08.2025, the accused appears to have been made an application by way of Exhibit-28 stating that as his parents were old and they were at Bombay, he has not been able to instruct his advocate to appear and conduct cross examination in the matter before the trial Court, and therefore, it was urged on behalf of the

Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by MANOJ KR. RAI(HC01072) on Thu Apr 02 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Apr 05 08:01:47 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/SCR.A/16911/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2026

0.10596788979298843

accused that his right to cross-examine the complaint may be open. Again, the plea of the Accused is totally vague as regards the alleged ailments suffered by his parents, or the pressing need to go to Mumbai instead of attending the Court hearings. Thus, the same is nothing

but a ruse to not remain present before the Trial Court.

5. In the entire petition, it is not even mentioned, as to when the right of the petitioner to cross examine the complainant arose. In terms of the established procedure, the right of cross-examination would arise in terms of section 145(2) of the Act. Only when the accused makes an application for cross-examining the complainant in respect of the affidavit submitted by the complainant, would such accused have a right to cross-examine the complaint. In the present petition, the petitioner has remained silent if, at the relevant point in time, such application was made, or otherwise. On perusal of Exhibit-28 also, does not appear as the accused or his advocate remained present on 07.10.2025 when the applicatio