IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.178/2008 Dhyneshwar Shende ..vs.. State =================================== CORAM: S.R. DONGAONKAR,J. DATE:24.3.2008. Heard Mr. Marchatwar, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. Patel, A.P.P. for state. Rule. Made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of parties. This is an application filed by the applicant / accused under section 482 of Cr.P.C. for challenging the order passed by the J.M.F.C. Court No.10, Nagpur, whereby his application for recalling the witnesses namely P.W. 1 Gayatri and P.W. 2 Complainant Ramesh for cross examination, was rejected. The main ground on which the said application was rejected appears to be that the applicant had refused to pay T.A. and D.A. for securing presence of the witnesses, when the adjournment was sought. Application as filed by the applicant seems to be raising sufficient ground for invoking jurisdiction of the trial court under section 311 of Cr.P.C. True that, his application is rejected, but it does appear that the applicant has misunderstood the proceedings and therefore, he refused to pay T.A. & D.A., vide paragraph 5 of the application. It also appears that the counsel for the applicant – accused had moved an application for recalling witnesses for cross examination for the detailed reasons mentioned in the application. It also appears that the applicant accused was required to cross examine the witnesses in absence of his counsel at the relevant time. Considering the totality of the circumstances, and in order to give fair opportunity to the applicant for defending himself, it is desirable to set aside impugned order in the interest of justice. In these circumstances, impugned order dated 11/12/2007 below Exh. 18 in Summary Criminal Case No.12430/2006 passed by the 10th J.M.F.C. Nagpur is hereby set aside. The learned trial court shall recall the witnesses as prayed on deposit of the cost amounting to T.A. & D.A. of the witnesses. On such deposit, the summonses be issued to those witnesses and they be allowed to be cross examined by the applicant. It is made clear that the applicant – accused shall not seek any adjournment if the witnesses are present for cross examination. Rule is made absolute in above terms. Application stands disposed of. JUDGE smp.