:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1931 OF 2008 Shailesh H. Bajaj ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and anr. ..Respondents Mr. Zal T. Andhyarujina with Mr. V.M. Sharma for applicant. Mr. A.H.H. Ponda wtih Mr. Girish B. Kedia for respondent no.2. Mr. A.S. Shitole, APP for State. CORAM: SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI,J. Date : November 19, 2008. Date : November 19, 2008. Date : November 19, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicant - original accused, learned Advocate for the respondent no. 2 - original complainant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant is facing prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in C.C. No. 346/SS/05. The said case is pending before the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, :2: Girgaon, Mumbai. In the course of the trial, during the course of cross-examination of PW 5 - Vijay Agarwal, the following question came to be asked to PW 5:- "From 01/01/97 till 31/12/97 was there any general/specific resolution passed by your company authorising anybody else (Apart from the resolution passed on 21/08/95) to transfer shares in the name of your company?" 3. The said question was objected by the learned Advocate for the complainant. The learned Magistrate disallowed the said question by order dated 19/3/2008. Being aggrieved thereby, revision application was preferred before the Sessions Court which came to be dismissed by order dated 7/5/2008. Hence, this application. 4. The learned Advocate for the complainant states that he has no grievance if the said question is allowed. In view of the statement and in the facts of the present case, in the interest of justice, the :3: said question is allowed. It is stated that PW 5 has been under cross-examination for the last two years and the trial is being prolonged. The learned Advocate for the applicant states that the cross-examination of PW 5 - Vijay Agarwal will be completed within five working days. The said statement is accepted. 5. In view of the above facts, the order dated 19/3/2008 passed by the learned Magistrate disallowing the question as well as the order dated 7/5/2008 passed by the Session Court are set aside. The said question is allowed. The cross-examination of PW 5 - Vijay Agarwal shall be completed within five working days. The trial is expedited and same be completed as expeditiously as possible and preferably by the end of February, 2009. 6. Application disposed of accordingly. (Smt.V.K. Tahilramani,J.) (Smt.V.K. Tahilramani,J.) (Smt.V.K. Tahilramani,J.)