1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Revision No. 42/2008 M/s. Rana Construction Company, thr. Managing Partner ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and 5 others --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Mardikar, Advocate for applicant. Ms. Khade, A.P.P. for non applicant no.1. None for other non applicants. CORAM:- R. Y. GANOO, J. DATED:- 30 th JULY, 2009. 1. The applicant has filed complaint in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 6, Nagpur being Criminal Complaint Case No.13138/2006 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate issued process against all the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act but has declined to issue process under Section 420 r/w section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. This order, by which process is declined, having regard to offence under Section 420 of the I.P.C. is not challenged by the applicant in any Court. Non applicant No. 6, M/s. Nagpur Allied Works Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the ‘said Company’), filed 2 Criminal Revision No. 237/2007, in the Sessions Court at Nagpur and the said revision came to be decided by learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge No. 9, Nagpur by order dated 21.11.2007. The said revision was allowed and process issued against non applicant no. 6 i.e. the said Company came to be quashed. This application is being filed, challenging the said order. 2. I have heard Mr. Mardikar, learned Advocate for the applicant and perused the text of the agreement dated 25.02.2005 executed between the applicant on one hand and non applicant nos. 2 to 4 and non applicant no. 6 on the other. The applicants were to carry out construction for the benefit of non applicant no. 2 and the monetary liability was fixed upon non applicant no.2. No liability was fixed upon non applicant no.6. With this, if the cheques issued by non applicant no. 2 have been dishonoured, no case is made out for issuance of process against the said company under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The view taken by learned Additional Sessions Judge is appropriate. No interference is required therein and the revision is liable to be dismissed. After the aforesaid order 3 is passed, Mr. Mardikar, learned advocate for applicant submitted that if in the course of recording of evidence, some evidence is found against the said company, then the applicant be permitted to adopt appropriate proceedings. The statement of learned Advocate is noted. No order in that behalf is required. If in the course of evidence of case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, any evidence comes forth, which has bearing qua non applicant no. 6, it will be open for the applicant to attend to the said aspect, in accordance with the provisions of law. Right now, this Court need not to pass any orders or express any views. The application stands dismissed with observations as aforesaid. JUDGE kahale