Jayant Meghani Through His Ca Shraddha Khandhadia v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS
64-wp-1988-1987-1986-1985-2022.doc VRJ
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1988 OF 2022 Mahendra Meghani ... Petitioner V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
... Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1986 OF 2022 Taru Meghani Thr. his CA Shrddha Khandhadia ... Petitioner V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
... Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1987 OF 2022 Jayant Meghani Thr. His CA Shraddha Khandhadia ... Petitioner V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
... Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1985 OF 2022 Mahendra Meghani Thr. His CA Shraddha Khandhadia ... Petitioner V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
... Respondents Mr. S.A. Jabbar i/by Mr. Ashish Pawar for the petitioners.
Ms. Divya Pawar i/by K. Rajani for the respondents. Mr. A.R. Patil, APP for the State.
CORAM :AMIT BORKAR, J.
DATED :MARCH 28, 2023
64-wp-1988-1987-1986-1985-2022.doc P.C.:
1.
The petitions are filed by the original complainant in a proceedings under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. During the course of evidence (examination-in-chief) of the complainant, four documents were produced. The four documents are (i) MoU dated 7th June 2014; (ii) MoU dated 22nd July 2014; (iii) Original allotment letter dated 7th June 2014 and; (iv) Original allotment letter dated 17th June 2014. 2.
In the examination-in-chief, the witness of the complainant stated on oath that she was present when all four documents were executed. She identified the signatures of the parties to all four the documents. She has stated that she has personal knowledge about the transaction. She has stated on oath that the contents of all four documents are true and correct. Therefore, in my opinion, all four documents stand proved. The inquiry about proof of document need not be postponed till the final hearing. The all four documents which are already exhibited shall be read in evidence. 3.
In that view of the matter, the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate, postponing the inquiry as to proof of document at the stage of final hearing is quashed and set aside. 4.
The writ petitions stand disposed of. No costs. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)