Rajnesh S/O Rajendrapal Naidu v. Neha W/O Rajnesh Naidu (Joshi) And Another

2.cwp.436.22 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Writ Petition No.436 of 2022 Rajnesh s/o Rajendrapal Naidu vs.

Neha w/o Rajnesh Naidu (Joshi) & another =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Mr. Anurag Gharote, Advocate for the Petitioner.

CORAM

: VINAY JOSHI, J.

DATE : 5 th JULY, .

Heard.

02] The petitioner/husband is the non-applicant in the proceedings filed by respondent No.1/wife claiming maintenance in terms of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The only grievance put by the petitioner/husband is that though he was allowed to conduct the crossexamination of the non-applicant/wife, however, the trial Court put a restrain that the cross-examination shall be completed on next date of the proceedings that too within one session of two hours.

03] The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that already his defence is struck off and, therefore, cross-examination is the only weapon for him to bring the truth as well as put his defence. It is submitted that the non-applicant/wife has produced thousands of documents in the proceedings and, therefore, it is incumbent on him to thoroughly cross-examine the non-applicant on each and every document.

2.cwp.436.22 2/2 04] As a matter of fact, as on date, the petitioner has been permitted to cross-examine with a rider as aforesaid mentioned. In other words, there is no denial for exercising right of cross-examination. In the circumstances, let the petitioner shall cross-examine the non-applicant/wife for one session of two hours as stated and thereafter, if anything remains, he shall seek further time. The trial Court is always at liberty to restrict the cross-examination subject to the relevancy. Having regard to the above facts, I do not deem it necessary to issue notice to other side as at this moment, this Court is not passing any adverse order against the nonapplicant/wife. The petitioner is in fact claiming relief in anticipation that he may not conclude cross-examination within the scheduled time. Already, the matter is expedited by the Supreme Court and by any means, the proceedings has to be expedited.

05] In view of the above, the impugned order dated 30/06/2022 passed on Exh.438 is hereby quashed and set aside. The trial Court shall permit the petitioner to crossexamine on assigned date for one session. The petitioner shall endeavour to conclude the cross-examination. If the crossexamination is not completed on scheduled date, he shall seek permission afresh of the learned Judge to conduct further cross-examination. The learned Trial Judge, on factual satisfaction, in his discretion pass suitable order. In case the trial Court declines further cross-examination, the petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

Signed by:SANDESH DAULATRAO WAGHMARE Private Secretary to the Hon'ble Judge JUDGE *sandesh