1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 3284 of 2009 ( Siyaram Prasad s/o Radheshyam Shukla ..vs.. State of Maharashtra ) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- None for the applicant. Mr. S.S. Doifode, APP for the State. CORAM:- S. S. SHINDE, J. DATED :- 20 th NOVEMBER, 2009 1. This application is filed praying to quash and set aside the order i.e. Annexure-1 at page No.7 of the compilation of the application is under challenged in this application. 2. The matter was called out in morning session, however none appeared for the applicant. Therefore, matter was kept at 2.30 p.m., however even in the second round none appears for the applicant. 3. On perusal of the grounds taken in the application, it would reveal that, the police has registered the crime against the accused vide Crime No.5/1992 as per report of complainant and filed the chargesheet. The complainant has not filed any private complaint against the accused in any Court. On perusal of the other grounds taken in the application, it is difficult to understand what the applicant wish to convey to 2 this Court. On perusal of the contents in the application, it appears that the notice issued by the Court at Annexure-1 at page No.7 of the compilation of the application is under challenged in this application. The application is aggrieved by the notice dated 20th July, 2009 sent by the Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha by which the present applicant is intimated to attend the Court proceedings on 24th August, 2009 at 10.30 a.m. On careful perusal of the contents in the application and prayers therein, there is no any challenge to any order passed either by the Judicial Magistrate First Class or Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha. The notice merely mentions that the applicant to remain present on 24th August, 2009 at 10.30 before the concerned Court. If the applicant is aggrieved by the contents of the notice, he can say so before the District and Sessions Judge, Wardha. Therefore, in my view, the application is misconceived and same is rejected. JUDGE adgokar