CARONA LTD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the applicants-original accused, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2-original complainant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

(2.) THE respondent no.2-complainant has filed about 95 cases under sections 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against the applicants Nos.1 and 2 and 5 to 6 other accused. Originally there were eight accused, however, one of them has expired. The original accused Nos.3 to 8 had preferred an application before the learned Magistrate. In the said application, it was prayed that the leading of defence evidence in these cases may be deferred till the evidence of the complainant is completed and the statements under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. of the accused are recorded in all those cases pending before that Court. The said application came to be allowed by the learned Magistrate by order dated 8.12.2006.

(3.) FROM the application preferred by original accused Nos.3 to 8, it is clear that they have prayed that the cases may be deferred till the evidence of the complainants is completed in all the cases pending before that Court. The said application came to be allowed. It may also be stated that as far as the application preferred by original accused Nos.3 to 8 is concerned the complainant, considering the requirement of speedy disposal, has consented to the prayer of the accused. The said reply is in writing which is annexed as Exhibit-E to this application. The said order was not challenged. In fact, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2-original complainant states that they are not aggrieved by the said order and hence, they have not challenged the said order.