IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.WRIT PETITION NO.937 OF 2008 Mr.Rohit Gupta .. Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.A.M.Saraogi for the Petitioner. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 10th July 2008. P.C.: . Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner has been arraigned as an accused in a complaint filed by the 2nd respondent under the provisions of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. The challenge in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is to the order passed below Exhibit 147 by the learned Magistrate by which the 2nd respondent complainant has been permitted to examine one Harminder Singh, its Customers Accounts : 2 : Manager. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has taken me through the complaint, affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief of the witness examined by the 2nd respondent by the name Sanjeev Mohan and the averments made in earlier applications by the 2nd respondent for leading secondary evidence. He pointed out that there is not even a reference in the aforesaid documents to the said Shri Harminder Singh. He submitted that only in the cross-examination, the petitioner gave a suggestion to said Shri Sanjeev Mohan that the said Shri Harminder Singh was concerned with the transaction. He submitted that in view of this factual position, the learned Magistrate could not have permitted the 2nd respondent to adduce evidence of the said Shri Harminder Singh. 3. I have carefully considered the submissions. The effect of the impugned order is that the said Shri Harminder Singh who was at the relevant time working as the Customers Accounts Manager of the 2nd respondent will be examined as a witness. Naturally it will be open for the petitioner and other accused persons to cross-examine him. 4. It is well settled law that the power of this : 3 : Court under section 482 of the said Code has to be used sparingly and in rarest of the rare cases. This is not at all one of those rare cases. No case is made out to exercise the extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petition is accordingly dismissed. (A.S.Oka,J)