MAHAVEER PRASAD SAINI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common question of facts and law are involved in all these five petitions, hence with the consent of counsel for the parties, these matters are taken up together for final disposal and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the same respondent-complainant filed similar kind of five criminal complaints against the petitioner under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act of 1881') wherein at the stage of defence evidence, his evidence was closed. Learned counsel submits that when the case was posted for evidence of the petitioner, he went on a religious pilgrim and he could not appear before the trial court and in that eventuality, his opportunity to examine himself in the witness box has been closed. Learned counsel submits that prior to that, on three different occasions, the petitioner was present in the court but the Presiding Officer was on leave. Hence, on account of said reasons, the evidence of the petitioner could not be recorded on those occasions. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cross-examination is a statutory right of an accused which has been denied to him by passing the order impugned. Hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted.

(3.) Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record.