BSE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel Shri. S.P. Salkar states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of Respondent No.2, who is present in the Court. He undertakes to file his Vakilpatra within a period of one week from today. Since learned counsel Shri. Salkar waives service for the Respondent No.2, I have proceeded to hear the matter, with consent of both the parties.

(2.) The Petitioner, who is the original complainant, has challenged the order dtd. 9/3/2020 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 16th Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai below Exhibit No.22 in C.C. No. 70/PW/2006. The Respondent No.2 is the accused in the said complaint. The Respondent No.2 was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Ss. 408, 420, 465, 467, 468 , 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ' I.P.C .').

(3.) Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the complainant's witness PW-1 Mr. P. S. Reddy was examined and his examination-in-chief was completed on 15/11/2018. After the examination-in-chief was concluded, the Petitioner-complainant made an application through the prosecuting-state for alteration in the charge under Sec. 420 of I.P.C., mentioning more facts relying on more documents. The learned trial Judge vide his order dated 20 th April, 2019 allowed that application and additional facts were noted in the charge under Sec. 420 of I.P.C. Thus, there was alteration and amendment in the charge, which was framed against the Respondent No.2. By that time, the cross-examination of the first prosecution witness had already commenced. At that stage, an application was moved vide Exhibit No.22 in the said proceedings for permitting re-examination of the said witness. The said application was opposed on behalf of the Respondent No.2, as the cross- examination was in progress.