1 Crim.Appln.No.2392/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2392 OF 2010 M/s.Ashwin Crane & Construction & Anr. ..Applicants vs. L & T Finance Limited & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.Rajendra Sorankar i/b. M/s.S.K. Jain & Associates for the Applicants. Mr.Anand Poojari with Ms.Shakuntala Joshi i/b. M/s.S.I. Shah & Co. for Respondent No.1. Mr.S.A. Shaikh, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : JULY 21, 2010 P.C. :- 1 Heard Counsel for the applicants and Counsel for Respondent No.1. 2 The applicant is the original accused. A complaint was filed against him by the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. One witness filed his 2 Crim.Appln.No.2392/2010 affidavit in lieu of evidence along with the documents. However, he was not available for cross- examination since he went abroad. Under these circumstances, the respondent filed an affidavit in lieu of evidence of another witness. This witness in his evidence made an averment that the affidavit in lieu of evidence of the first witness along with the documents may be treated as part of his evidence. An application was filed by the accused taking objection to certain portion of the affidavit in lieu of evidence of the second witness and also the method adopted by the complainant in trying to bring on record the evidence of the first witness without offering him for cross-examination. The trial court decided the said application and made an observation that the said objection will be decided at the final hearing of the case. The applicant has taken objection to the admissibility of the said evidence of the first witness as also regarding the admissibility of the documents which were annexed to the first affidavit. 3 Crim.Appln.No.2392/2010 3 It is submitted that the trial court ought to have decided the said application and should have upheld the objection raised by the applicants herein. 4 I am unable to accept this contention. It is always open for the learned Magistrate to note the objection which is raised by a party to the trial and decide it at the final hearing of the case. Hence, no prejudice is caused to the applicant herein since his objection has been noted and no final order has been passed. It is not possible, therefore, to interfere with the said order passed by the trial court. All contentions raised by the applicant and the respondents in this application are kept open. 5 Application is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.)