1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.123 OF 2009 Viraf Fali Kanga ...Petitioner vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.Jhangir Khojotia for the petitioner Mr.Y.M.Nakhawa A.P.P for State CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE :JUNE 17, 2009 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has been arraigned as an accused in a private complaint filed by the second respondent. After examination in chief of the complainant was recorded, an adjournment was granted to the accused to cross examine the complainant. An application was made on 4th January 2008 by the complainant for production of the original documents. The said application was allowed on 12th February 2008 by the learned Magistrate. One more application was made by the complainant for exhibiting the said documents. The said application was disallowed by the learned Magistrate. Therefore, an application was made on 12th February 2008 by the complainant for invoking section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The said application has been allowed by the learned Magistrate and the criminal revision application preferred by the applicant against the said order has been dismissed. 2 Annexures to the petition show that the cross examination of the complainant has not proceeded. The learned Judge allowed the production of the original documents but did not exhibit the same. Therefore,a 2 discretionary order has been passed by the learned Judge under section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. There is no reason to interfere with the discretionary order. Petition is rejected. JUDGE