[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NOs.4354 TO 4358 OF 2008 WITH CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.3172 OF 2008 Shri.Mahendra K.Khatau and Anr. ..Applicants Vs. Vilas L.Bhosale and Ors. ..Respondents ... Mr.A.H.Ponda Adv. along with Mr.Sandeep K.Karnik advocate for applicant Mr.Y.M.Nakhwa A.P.P. for the State Mr.Abhaukumar Apte Adv. Respondents-complainants ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : DECEMBER 4, 2008 DATE : DECEMBER 4, 2008 DATE : DECEMBER 4, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicants-original accused, the learned advocate for the respondents i.e. original complainants and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. Mr.Ponda, the learned advocate for the applicants states that approximately 90 complaints [-2-] have been filed against the applicants under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The said cases are pending before the learned Special Metropolitan Magistrate, 25th Court, Mumbai. The amount involved in each of the said cases is Rs.1,05,000/-. In the said cases, the learned Magistrate permitted recall of the prosecution witnesses at the instance of the applicants on payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- in each case. Mr.Ponda submitted that direction to pay costs of Rs.5000/- deserves to be quashed and set aside in view of the fact that applicants could not cross-examine prosecution witnesses as Transfer Application preferred by the co-accused, was pending. Thereafter, the Transfer Application came to be allowed by the Principal Judge, Sessions Court Greater Mumbai. The said order came to be challenged by filing Writ Petition No.1967 of 2007. By order dated 28.2.2008, the said petition came to be dismissed holding that the view taken by the Principal Judge Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai, cannot be faulted with. The view taken by the learned Sessions Judge was that there exists a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the accused, that they would not get a fair trial at the hands [-3-] of the Presiding Officer trying the said cases and he allowed the revision and transferred the cases to some other Judge. 3. In view of the above facts, though orders of recall of witnesses is confirmed, the part of the order imposing costs of Rs.5,000/- for recall of witnesses in case Nos. 210/SS/2008 to 231/SS/2008 i.e. in all 21 cases, is set aside. 4. Applications are disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]