1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1503 OF 2010 Mr. Farokh Khodadad Irani & Ors. ..... Applicants. V/s Mr. Kuresh Rustom Kushesh & Anr. ..... Respondents. Mr. Girish Kulkarni for the applicants. Mr. Anil Lalla i/b Lalla & Lalla for respondent No.1. Mr. S.S. Pednekar, APP for the State. CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATE : 30TH APRIL, 2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned Counsel for the Respondents. 2. Applicants are challenging the order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 40th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai whereby application for discharge filed by the applicants under section 245(2) was rejected. 3. A complaint has been lodged by the Respondents under sections 504, 506(II) read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and on the basis of the complainant and the averments 2 made therein, process was issued by the learned Magistrate. The application for discharge made by the applicants herein, however, was rejected. The learned Magistrate has observed that the complainant should first be given opportunity to lead evidence under section 244 of the Cr.P.C. and, thereafter, a stage would come to apply for discharge under section 245(2). 4. In my view, there is no infirmity in the said order passed by the learned Magistrate. The complainant has every right to lead evidence before framing of charge and the accused would then be entitled to file an application for discharge. 5. Hence, no case is made out for interfering with the order passed by the learned Magistrate. Application is dismissed. Applicants are always at liberty to apply for discharge under section 245(2) at the appropriate stage. 6. Application is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.) 3