1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.534 OF 2009 Nilaben S. Parekh Sureshchandra V. Parekh ...Petitioners vs. Housing Development Finance Corpn. And others ...Respondents Both the petitioners present in person Mr.Virag Tulzapurkar, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Kunal Vajani and Mr.Pervez Bapuna i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co. for respondent no.1 CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : JUNE 26, 2009 P.C. 1 Heard the second petitioner appearing in person. This court suggested to the second petitioner that legal aid can be made available but the second petitioner declined to accept legal aid. It is not in dispute that four prosecution witnesses have been already examined by the first respondent and one of the witnesses is under the cross examination of the petitioners. An application for discharge made earlier by the petitioners has been rejected and the said order has been confirmed by this court. 2 As four witnesses have been examined and the application for discharge has already been rejected, this 2 application for quashing the complaint cannot be entertained. 3 The second petitioner appearing in person submits that the first petitioner is unwell and she may be granted exemption. If the first petitioner is unwell, she can always apply to the trial court for exemption and the trial court is bound to consider the said application in accordance with law. 4 Subject to what is observed above, writ petition is rejected. 5 The trial shall be concluded as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of one year from today provided the petitioners co-operate for expeditious disposal of the trial. 6 All contentions raised by the petitioners on merits are kept open. JUDGE