:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2029 OF 2008 Mr. Sarvasiddhi Krishnamohan ..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & anr. ..Respondents Mr. A.M. Saraogi for petitioner. Mr. A.R. Patil, APP for State. Mr. Shirish Gupte, Senior Advocate with Mr. G.H. Keluskar for respondent no.2. CORAM: SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI,J. Date : November 24, 2008. Date : November 24, 2008. Date : November 24, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner - original accused, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 - original complainant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner is seeking quashing of proclamation which has been issued against him and also the non bailable warrant which has been issued against him. The proclamation and non bailabale warrant has been issued in C.C. No. 2547/SS/2006, :2: which is pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 13th Court, Bhoiwada, Mumbai. The said case is under Section 138 of N.I. Act. 3. It is seen that the petitioner has an efficacious alternate remedy of preferring an application before the trial court for setting aside the said order issuing proclamation and the order issuing non bailable warrant. Hence, I am not inclined to entertain the present petition. 4. Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to prefer appropriate proceeding before the trial court. To enable the petitioner to prefer necessary application before the trial court, the proclamation and non bailable warrant is stayed for a period of four weeks from today. The learned Advocate for the petitioner makes a statement that the petitioner will appear before the trial court. All contentions left open. In case such an application is preferred, the learned Magistrate to dispose of the said application on merits. :3: (Smt.V.K. Tahilramani,J.) (Smt.V.K. Tahilramani,J.) (Smt.V.K. Tahilramani,J.)