Allowed

Vishal Car Decor v. Arushi Car Decor

Rajasthan HC23 Apr 2019CRLMP/606/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-bench order allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the trial court's order dismissing the petitioner's application for cross-examination. The High Court granted one more opportunity, subject to payment of costs, and directed no further adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; petitioner permitted to cross-examine respondent on 17.05.2019 on payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/-; no further adjournment allowed.

Vishal Car Decor Vs Arushi Car Decor — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 606/2019

¶3

Vishal Car Decor, Through its Proprietor Smt. Pavneet Kaur Wife Of Shri Vishal Bhalla, Office Address- Vishal Car Decor, Gopalpura Mod, Under Fly Over, Tonk Road, Jaipur Raj. Permanent Address- 4-Tha-16, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur Raj.

¶4

----Accused/Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Arushi Car Decor, Through Its Proprietor Smt. Ranjna Thakral Wife Of Shri Ashwin Thakral, Resident Of 21/180, Kaveri Path Mansarovar, Jaipur Raj.

¶7

----Complainant/Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Amit Puri
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Atul Sharma, PP
	Mr. Gajendra Vyas, for complainant

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

¶10

Judgment / Order

¶11

23/04/2019

¶12

This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 04.01.2019 whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C for affording the petitioner an opportunity for cross examining the complainant was dismissed by the trial Court.

¶13

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that at least one more opportunity be given to the petitioner so that the petitioner can cross-examine the complainant.

¶14

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondentcomplainant has supported the order passed by the trial Court and has submitted that the same does not require any interference by this Court.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLMP-606/2019]

¶17

Heard and perused the record.

¶18

It is revealed that on 16.10.2018 case was fixed for crossexamination of the complainant but an adjournment was sought by the counsel for the petitioner for the same and the case was fixed for 12.11.2018 for cross-examination. On 12.11.2018, opportunity of cross-examining the complainant was closed.

¶19

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I think it deem fit and proper to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant on the payment of cost.

¶20

Consequently, the petition is allowed. The impugned order passed by the trial Court is set aside. The petitioner is permitted to cross-examine the complainant on 17.05.2019, on the payment of cost of Rs.5,000/-. The respondent is entitled to receive the same. It is made clear that no further adjournment shall be given for the same and right of cross-examination will be closed.

¶21

Both the parties are directed to be present in the trial Court on 17.05.2019.

¶22

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶23

Mohit Rohila /40

Vishal Car Decor v. Arushi Car Decor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Car Decor v. Arushi Car Decor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju Yadav S/O Shri Panchu Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Dilsukh S/O Shri Tikuram B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Dheer Singh S/O Shri Chhajulal B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Abdul Kareem Vs Mohammad Yasin

Rampat S/O Shri Dhansiram B/C Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Govind Narain Johari S/O Late Shri Bhanwar Lal Johari Vs Union of India