IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.220 OF 2008 G.D.K.Diwan .. Petitioner Vs. Rajesh Wadhwa & Ors. .. Respondents Ms.Manisha Pant i/by Bhave & Co. for the petitioner. Ms.Praveena Kamani i/by Mr.S.P.Narkar for respondent No.1. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, A.P.P for the State. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 04th September 2008. P.C.: . By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 06th December 2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge in revision application as well as order dated 03rd January 2008 passed by the learned Magistrate. 2. The 1st respondent is the original complainant who filed a complaint alleging commission of offences under section 138 read with sections 141 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. An order was passed on the said complaint of issuing process. A revision application being Criminal Revision Application No.1108 of 2007 was filed by the petitioner before the Sessions : 2 : Court. By judgment and order dated 06th December 2007, the learned Additional Sessions Judge partly allowed the revision application by quashing the order issuing process as against the petitioner. The learned Additional Sessions Judge directed the learned Metropolitan Magistrate to consider afresh the question of issuing process against the petitioner after considering the factum of resignation of the present petitioner. On the basis of the said order passed in revision application, the learned Magistrate passed an order on 03rd January 2008 issuing process against the present petitioner. 3. The challenge in this petition is twofold. The first challenge is to the order of the Sessions Court passed on 06th December 2007 and the second challenge is to the order issuing process. The submission is that there could not have been an order of remand by the Sessions Court and the said order of Sessions Court is illegal. The other submission is that on merits also process could not have been issued against the petitioner. 4. The present petition was filed in this Court on 01st February 2008. The learned Magistrate had already : 3 : acted upon the impugned order passed in revision by passing the order dated 03rd January 2008. 5. The petitioner can always challenge the order dated 03rd January 2008 on merits by filing a revision application under section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. If the petitioner succeeds in the revision application, if filed, the challenge to order dated 06th December 2007 will be merely academic. Even if the petitioner fails in revision application, the petitioner can always file a fresh petition in this Court for challenging the order dated 06th December 2007 as well as the order dated 03rd January 2008. In view of this position, this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 is not entertained and the same is disposed of by keeping the remedy of the petitioner open. 6. If such a revision application is filed by the petitioner, the concerned Sessions Court is bound to note that the present writ petition was filed on 01st February 2008 and on 30th June 2008, the petitioner was directed to serve copy of the petition to the 1st respondent. On 18th July 2008 this Court permitted : 4 : amendment to be carried out for challenging the order dated 03rd January 2008 and that the petition remained pending in this Court till today. These relevant factors are bound to be considered by the Sessions Court while considering the prayer for condonation of delay in filing revision application. 7. It is made clear that all contentions of the parties on merits are expressly kept open. (A.S.Oka,J)