[2025:RJ-JD:23672]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4072/2025 Mamta Maheshwari D/o Late Shri Rampal Ji Somani, Aged About

48 Years, Resident Of 1 Shivaji Nagar Inside Udiyapole Udaipur ----Petitioner Versus

1. Sudheer Mutha S/o Shri Laxmi Narayan Mutha, Resident Of C 403 Archi Peace Park New Vidhyanagar Hiran Magri Sector 4 Udaipur

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narendra Thanvi Mr. Mahendra Thanvi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shriram Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

15/05/2025

1. By way of filing the present criminal misc. petition under Section 528 BNSS, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“It is therefore, most humbly & respectfully prayed that instant criminal misc. petition may kindly be allowed and the order impugned dated 23.12.2024 & consequential order dated 10.01.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (N.I. Act Cases) No. 1, Udaipur in criminal complaint no 8360/2019 filed by the non-petitioner/complainant against the humble petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act may kindly be ordered to be quashed and set aside throughout and right of the humble petitioner to cross examine the non-petitioner/complainant may kindly be revived/re- open. Any other appropriate order or direction which may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

2. The petitioner is facing trial for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. The present criminal misc. petition has been filed with a prayer that the order whereby the opportunity of cross-examination of complainant was closed may be quashed and set aside. Learned counsel submitted that the fair trial is a fundamental right of a person and cross-examination with witness is the statutory right of the accused. Learned counsel submitted that one last opportunity be granted to the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant- witness.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record.

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of “Natasha Singh v. CBI (State)” reported in 2013 AIR SCW 3554 has held in para 9 as under:-

"Fair trial is the main object of criminal procedure, and it is the duty of the court to ensure that such fairness is not hampered or threatened in any manner. Fair trial entails the interests of the accused, the victim and of the society, and therefore, fair trial includes the grant of fair and proper opportunities to the person concerned, and the same must be ensured as this is a constitutional, as well as a human right."

5. Having considered the fact and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of “Natasha Singh (Supra)”, this Court deems it just and appropriate to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 23.12.2024 and 10.01.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (N.I. Act Cases) No.1, Udaipur in Criminal Complaint No.8362/2019. It is directed that on the next date of hearing before the learned trial Court or any other date as may be fixed by the learned trial Court, the petitioner shall be given one last opportunity to cross-examine the complainant-witness. It is made clear that no further opportunity would be granted to the petitioner, if he fails to cross-

examine the complainant- witness on that date.

6. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition as well as all pending applications are disposed of accordingly.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

243-himanshu/-