1 (WP 2923 of 2010) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2923 OF 2010 Smita P. Indulkar ...Petitioner Vs. Kishor G. Chawla & Anr. ...Respondents ----- Mr.J.S. Kini i/b. Mr. Suresh Dubey for the Petitioner Mr.Mohan Raheja for Respondent No.1 Mrs. M.R.Tidake -APP for the State ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 12TH OCTOBER, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1. 2. Grievance of the Petitioner is that the Respondent No.1-Original Complainant has been permitted to produce the original power of attorney of the complainant after the cross examination is over and after a specific case was put to the witness that no power of attorney was issued by the complainant in his favour. 3. In my view, the submission made by the learned 2 (WP 2923 of 2010) Counsel for the Petitioner cannot be accepted. The Magistrate has a discretion to permit re-examination of the witness in the interest of justice. In the present case, the original power of attorney was not produced by the witness. No prejudice, therefore, would be caused to the accused if he permitted to produce the power of attorney. Upon production of the power of attorney, it is always open for the Petitioner to cross examine him in respect of the matters, which are sought to be brought on record in re-cross examination. 4. Hence, no case is made out for interfering with the impugned order. Writ petition is dismissed. (V.M. KANADE J.)