bsb IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 301 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 301 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 301 OF 2008 Shri Nanik Jeswani ... Petitioner v/s Shri Mohanlal R. Sharma & anr. ... Respondents Mr.Mandar Limaye for the petitioner. Mr.D.P.Adsule, A.P.P. for the respondent No.2 State. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DATED: DATED: 10TH APRIL, 2008 10TH APRIL, 2008 10TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. This petition challenges the orders passed by the Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Ulhasnagar on 3.5.2007 and the order passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kalyan in Criminal Revision Application No. 84 of 2007. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the complainant has filed an affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief. Thereafter, an application was made by the complainant for an order directing "No cross" as the accused had failed to cross-examine the witness in spite of several opportunities granted. Although such an application was filed, the complainant 2 filed additional documents and sought to lead oral evidence by way of examination-in-chief. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner/accused that the Courts below have committed an illegality by permitting the complainant to adduce oral evidence in continuation of the affidavit of evidence when he filed an application for an order directing "No cross". 3. In my view, the petition is frivilous. Admittedly, no order has been passed on the application filed by the complainant for disallowing the petitioner’s cross-examination. The complainant has been permitted to adduce further evidence before the cross-examination commences. Both the Courts below have not committed any error in granting such permission. 4. Petition dismissed.