1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3465/2008. Karishma D/o Dhananjay Satarkar @ Karishma w/o Ravindra Kumavat - APPLICANT VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra & Anr. - RESPONDENTS ***** Mr.S.G.Dodya, Advocate for Applicant; Mr.KM Suryawanshi, APP for State. None for Respondent No.2,though served. ----- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 4th September,2009. PER COURT : 1) Heard learned Counsel for applicant. 2) The matter is circulated at the instance of other side (husband), however Counsel for respondent/husband is absent though the matter is repeatedly called. 3) The matrimonial relations between the wife and husband did not yield good and peaceful results and were required to severe with certain understanding between them. It was in this scenario, by agreement dated 2nd September, 2005, as a part of maintenance, the husband has parted with a truck to be plied by the wife and to 2 maintain herself. It was at such time, the wife handed over 35 blank signed cheques to the husband as security towards payment of installments of the said truck. 4) The wife contend that she has been regularly remitting the amount pursuant to the agreement, however, in December, 2006, she realized that her husband has fraudulently executed an agreement on 2nd September, suppressing the fact that he stopped to pay the amount of installments and also stopped payment of cheques, remitting the same to the financer. 5) The wife did not honour the cheques issued in favour of her husband and consequently, proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are initiated at different place. In paragraph 7, the wife has given the details of cases pending with 4th JMFC, Aurangabad (SCC 1836/07); SCC No.367/07 before 6th JMFC, Aurangabad; SCC 2079/07 before JMFC at Udgir; SCC 76/08 before 6th JMFC, Dhule; and SCC 428/07 before JMFC, Bhadgaon. The wife has desired that these cases to be clubbed and kept at Aurangabad before one single Judge. 6) There was identical situation between wife and the husband, which she moved by Criminal Application No.3477/2007 and by order dated 23.6.2008, her request was allowed and the prosecution, subject matter of said Application, 3 came to be directed to be heard along with one case. 7) Considering the difficulties to be faced by the wife and genuineness of the parties including the witnesses, the matter needs to be heard by 5th JMFC, Aurangabad with other identical matters between the same parties. 8) Criminal Application allowed in above terms. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE bdv/cran3465.08