WP.1966-10 - 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No. 1966 OF 2010 M/s. Surendra Automobiles ...Petitioner Vs. Mr. Santosh Narayan Khalate & Anr. ...Respondents *** Mr. S. V. Sadavarte, for the Petitioner. Mrs. M. R. Tidake, APP for the Respondent-State. *** CORAM: V. M. KANADE J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 2, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. By this petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 10th June, 2010, passed by the learned J.M.F.C. Baramati, who was pleased to reject the application of the petitioner for re-examination of the complainant’s witness. I have perused the impugned order. The learned Magistrate has given cogent reasons for rejecting the application. It is well settled position in law that application for re-examination cannot be allowed and permitted to fill up WP.1966-10 - 2 - the lacuna in the prosecution case. 2. In the present case, the complainant is already examined. He is cross-examined at length; all the documents on which he wanted to bring on record are exhibited and part of the documentary evidence. When the matter was kept for final arguments, the application was moved by the petitioner, seeking permission to re-examine his witness. Therefore, it is not possible for this Court to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate, in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. [ V. M. KANADE J.]