[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.665 OF 2008 IN CRI.APPLN.NOS.16 TO 19 OF 2007 IN CRI.APPLN.NOS.4716, 4838, 4839 & 4840 OF 2004 Mr.Paresh P.Rajda ..Applicant Vs. The State of Mah. and Anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.P.D.Sampat Adv.for Mr.V.B.Singh Adv. for Applicant Mr.Sanjog S.Parab Adv. for Respondent No.2 Ms.A.A.Mane A.P.P. for the State ... WITH CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.666 OF 2008 IN CRI.APPLN.NOS.20 TO 23 OF 2007 IN CRI.APPLN.NOS.4717, 4835, 4836 & 4837 OF 2004 Mr.Vijay K.Shrof ..Applicant Vs. The State of Mah. and Anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.P.D.Sampat Adv.for Mr.V.B.Singh Adv. for Applicant Mr.Sanjog S.Parab Adv. for Respondent No.2 Ms.A.A.Mane A.P.P. for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : NOVEMBER 25, 2008 DATE : NOVEMBER 25, 2008 DATE : NOVEMBER 25, 2008 [-2-] P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants-original accused, the learned counsel for the respondent-original complainant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicants are facing prosecution in cases i.e. Case Nos 1 to 4 of 2008 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Process has been issued against the applicants under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The said order has been challenged before this Court by filing Criminal Application No. 4716 of 2004, 4838 of 2004, 4829 of 2004 and 4840 of 2004. By order dated 8.2.2005 and 6.10.2006 stay to the proceedings before the trial Court was granted. 3. However, thereafter matters came to be dismissed for default by order dated 18.12.2006. Applications were preferred for restoration and the matters came to be restored to file by order dated 29.1.2007. However, in the order whereby the applications came to be restored to file, there is no reference to the interim relief being continued, [-3-] hence, these applications have been preferred for clarification of the order dated 29.1.2007. The clarification is sought whether the order for restoration also restores the order of stay granted by this Court on 8.2.2005 and 6.10.2006. As the matter is kept before the trial Court on 11.12.2008 and these matters are being kept on 10.12.2008 for admission and final disposal at the admission stage, in my view, it is not necessary to go into the controversy whether the orders restoring the applications or recalling the order of dismissal for default, restore the stay order. In view of the above facts, it is not necessary to entertain these applications at this stage. 4. Applications are disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]