Shivdas Kumjunni Nair v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR
1 /3 45-APL-835-16.doc Ladda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 835 OF 2016 ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 836 OF 2016 ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 837 OF 2016 ALONG WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 838 OF 2016 Shivdas Kumjunni Nair ..Applicant/Orig.Accused Vs The State of Maharashtra & 1 Anr ..Respondents.
Mr Ashok Bhatia for the applicant.
Smt. P.P. Bhosale, APP for the State.
CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J.
DATE : 1st August, 2016 P.C.
1) The present applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 are filed by the applicant/accused challenging the Orders dated 7/7/2016 passed below Exhs-43, 19, 38 and 45 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 70th Court, Mazgaon at Sewree, Mumbai, thereby rejecting the application under section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed by him in C.C.No. 5350/SS/2014, C.C. No. 979/SS/2015, C.C.No.
2 /3 45-APL-835-16.doc 1465/SS/2015 and C.C.No. 5351/SS/2014 respectively, seeking directions to the complainant-respondent no.2 herein, to produce the documents pertaining to case Nos. 17309/SS/2012 and 17310/SS/2012 filed before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 71st Court, Mazgaon at Sewree, Mumbai and C.C. No. 17026/SS/2012 filed before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Thane.
2) Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP and also perused the record annexed to the applications. 3) The record reveals that the applicant was impleaded as an accused in the said C.C.No.17026/2012 filed before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Thane and in C.C. Nos. 17309/SS/2012 and 17310/SS/2012 filed before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Mazgaon at Sewree, Mumbai. Though it is the contention of the applicant that he was never served with the summons of the said complaint and the matter was settled prior to it, I am of the view that as the applicant was a party to the said proceedings, he is entitled to file an application before the concerned Court and get the certified copies of the said documents and it is not necessary to call upon the respondent no.2 to produce the said documents under section 91 of
3 /3 45-APL-835-16.doc the Cr.P.C. As far as the present applications below Exhs-43, 19, 38 and 45 respectively, filed by the applicant is concerned, I am of the considered opinion that the applicant only with a view to protract the trial in the respective cases has filed the same. In my opinion, the Trial Court has not committed any error in rejecting the said applications below Exhs-43, 38,19 and 45 respectively by the impugned orders.
4) In my view, there are no merits in the applications and the applications are accordingly dismissed.
(A.S. GADKARI, J.)