JUDGMENT 1. - This Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C ha been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 9.4.2014 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur Metropolitan (for short 'the Revisional Court hereinafter), whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed as not maintainable. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 12.3.2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No. 9, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Case No. 7413/2009, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 91 Cr.P.C. in the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act pending against him, has been rejected. 2. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 12.3.2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No. 9, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Case No. 7413/2009, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 91 Cr.P.C. in the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act pending against him, has been rejected. 2. The Trial Court, while rejecting the application under Section 91 Cr.P.C has observed as under: " mHk; i{kdkjku ds rdksZa ij euu fd;k x;kA i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;kA i=koyh ds voyksdu ls ;g tkfgj gS fd fnukad 12-12-2011 dks eqyfte e; vf/koDrk mifLFkr Fkk rFkk mlus jkthukek gsrq le; pkgrs gq;s ikap gtkj :i;s ifjoknh dks vkaf'kd Hkqxrku isVs iznku fd;sA blds i'pkr~ Hkh vfHk;qDr }kjk yxkrkj jkthukek gsrq volj fy;s tkrs jgsaA fnukad 13-9-2012 dks eqyfte us 'ks"k pSd jkf'k gsrq 15&20 fnu dk iqu% volj pkgkA fnukad 17-1-2013 dks ifjoknh ,oa vfHk;qDr nksuksa esa mifLFkr Fks] fdUrq ifjoknh ls ftjg ugha dj iqu% jkthukek gsrq le; pkgk x;k rFkk vfHk;qDr us ;g fy[kr esa fn;k fd og pSd jkf'k fnukad 17-2-2013 rd vnk dj nsxkA blds i'pkr fnukad 18-2-2013 dks vfHk;qDr us 5]000 :i;s iqu% ifjoknh dks vnk fd;sA fnukad 15-5-2013 dks vfHk;qDr us iqu% fy[kdj fn;k fd og fnukad 1-6-2013 dks nl gtkj :i;s ifjoknh dks nsxk rFkk fnukad 1-6-2013 dks iqu% fy[kdj fn;k fd og ,d eghus ckn 15]000 :i;s ifjoknh dks vnk djsxkA fnukad 4-7-2003 dks vfHk;qDr us pSd jkf'k esa ls vkaf'kd Hkqxrku isVs nks gtkj :i;s vnk fd;sA bl izdkj bl izdj.k esa vc rd vfHk;qDr ds vkpj.k ;s ;g tkfgj gS fd vfHk;qDr us Lo;a gh pSd jkf'k dk nkf;Ro Lohdkj djrs gq;s mlesa ls dqN jkf'k vkaf'kd Hkqxrku isVs ifjoknh dks vnk Hkh dh gSA ;g Hkh egRoiw.kZ gS fd gSA ;g Hkh egRoiw.kZ gS fd ;g izdj.k /kkjk 138 ,u0vkbZ0 ,DV ls lEcfU/kr gS ftlesa fookfnr pSd ij fof/kd mRrjnkf;Ro isVs gh iznku fd;k x;k gSA vr% ifjoknh ds fy;s ;g vko';d ugha gksrk gS fd fof/kd nkf;Ro ds vfLrRo dks fdlh u fdlh uk fdlh izdkj ds nLrkost ls izekf.kr djsaA fygktk mijksDr foospu fo'ys"k.k ds vk/kkj ij vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls is'k dh xbZ nj[okLr Lohdkj fd;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr izrhr ugha gksrk gSA fygktk is'k dh xbZ nj[okLr vUrxZr /kkjk 91 lhvkj0ih0lh0 vLohdkj dj [kkfjt dh tkrh gSA " 3. From perusal of the order of the Trial Court, it is clear that the petitioner has never disputed the fact that he is liable to repay the loan amount advanced to him by the complainant and on many occasions, he made part payment to the complainant. After seeking time from the Court, for the purpose of entering into compromise on several occasions and after making part payment, the petitioner filed the application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. and prayed for summoning of the documents relating to the loan transaction executed between him and the complainant. 4. After considering the above noted facts, this Court is of the opinion that once the petitioner has sought time for entering into a compromise with the complainant and also made part payment of the dues to the complainant, the action of the respondent of moving application under Section 91 Cr.P.C. is nothing but an abuse of process of the Court. The petitioner is trying to delay the Proceedings before the Trial Court by making such frivolous application, after dismissal of application under Section 91 Cr.P.C, the petitioner filed a revision petition before the Revisional Court, though the same was not maintainable, and has there after preferred this Criminal Misc. Petition before this Court only with an intention to delay the proceedings pending before the Trial Court. The conduct of the petitioner is not appreciable and such conduct of a litigant is liable to be discourage. 5. Hence, this Criminal Misc. Petition is dismissed with a cost of Rs. 1000/-. Stay petition also stands dismissed.Petition dismissed. *******