1 WP : 467/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.467 OF 2011 Bhaskar Sen ……… Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra ……… Respondents & Anr. Mr.O.A.Siddhiqui, Advocate for petitioners. Mrs.U.V. Kezriwal, APP for State. CORAM : Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. Date : 25th February 2011. PC.: 1. This writ petition challenges the order dated 14th October 2010 passed on Exhibit 128 by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 8th Court, Thane. The application was filed by respondent no.2, the original complainant requesting the court for passing an order that the applicant, who is the accused in the proceedings be not allowed to cross- examine the complainant and also issuance of non bailable warrant against the applicant. The learned Magistrate by the impugned order, rejected the application for recording that there will be no cross-examination by the petitioner on the ground that such an order cannot be passed on the application presented for issuance of non bailable warrant. He, however, issued non bailable warrant against the 2 WP : 467/2011 petitioner. It has been complained on behalf of the petitioner that there was an order of exemption granted in his favour and the Advocate for the petitioner had been attending to the matter regularly. However, the record shows that because of the conduct of the petitioner and his advocate, the complaint had not made any progress for long time. The record shows that on 3rd July 2010, because of non attendance of the petitioner, his lawyer did not proceed with the matter. The court had awarded costs of Rs.2500/- to be paid to the respondent and adjourned the matter to 12th July 2010. On the adjourned date, neither the costs were paid nor any progress in the matter was made. Hence, the court adjourned the matter to 6th August 2010. On that date, the petitioner filed an application for time to deposit the costs and the Court called for say of the respondent. Since the matter did not proceed further on that date, there was a further order of costs passed on that day directing the petitioner to pay the costs quantified at Rs.2,000/- to the respondent. The matter was adjourned to 21st August 2010, then to 8th September 2010 and finally to 14th October 2010, when the impugned order came to be passed. 2. It has been contended by the petitioner that the petitioner has complied with two of the orders of costs i.e. costs of Rs.2,000/- and Rs.500/-. He has till date not deposited the costs awarded 3 WP : 467/2011 on 3rd July 2010. Perusal of the Roznama shows that some Advocate on behalf of the petitioner has been simply appearing in the matter without making any constructive progress. This compelled the respondent to file the application at Exhibit 128 on 14th October 2010. In view of this background of the case, this court is not inclined to interfere with the order of issuance of non bailable warrant against the petitioner. Besides the petitioner has remedy of approaching the trial court for cancellation of the warrant. Hence, the petition is dismissed. ( Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J.)