1 spb/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3909 OF 2009 M/s. Sunny Gloves Industries & Ors. .. Applicants. V/s. Smt. Divya Ramesh Sanghavi & Anr. .. Respondents. --- WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3910 OF 2009 M/s. Sunny Gloves Industries & Ors. .. Applicants. V/s. Smt. Divya Ramesh Sanghavi & Anr. .. Respondents. --- Mr. M.K. Kocharekar for the Applicants. Mr. R.T.Kukareja with Devang H. Shah for the Respondent No.1. Mrs. P.P. Bhosale, APP for the State. . --- CORAM : B. R. GAVAI, J. DATED : 25th FEBRUARY, 2010. P.C. : 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith in both the applications. 2. The applicants challenge the order dated 11.06.2009 of issuance of process in criminal case no. 2544/SS of 2009 and in Cri. case no. 2545/SS 2 of 2009 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 20th Court, Mazgaon, Mumbai. 3. The applicants press into service two grounds. Firstly, verification that has been done by the learned Magistrate has been done in the mechanical manner and secondly since the accused are residing beyond territorial jurisdiction of the court before whom the case is filed, could not have issued process unless an inquiry as contemplated under section 202 of Cr.P.C. was either conducted by the learned Magistrate himself or through the police machinery. The learned single Judge of this court in the case of Amarnath Baijnath Gupta & Anr. vs. M/s. Mohini Organics Pvt. Ltd., [(2009) ALL MR (Cri) 184], has held that the verification as contemplated under section 200 of the Cr.P.C. is not an empty formality and cannot be done in the mechanical manner. 4. Perusal of the verification in both the cases in hand would reveal that the verification is done by filling up the blanks in the already prepared format and it can thus be seen that the said verification is not in accordance with the law laid down by this court in Amarnath B. Gupta’s case, cited supra. 5. This court in the case of Capt. S.C.Mathur & Anr. vs. M/s. 3 Elektronik Lab & Ors. in Criminal Application No. 2640 of 2009 with companion matters, has held that when the accused reside in the area which is beyond territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate before whom the complaint is filed, the concerned Magistrate is bound to make inquiry by himself or through police machinery or through any other agency or by any such other persons before issuance of process and till then he has to postpone the issuance of process. In the present case, it can be seen that the accused is residing beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the Magistre before whom the complaint is filed. As such on this ground also the applications will have to be succeeded. 6. Hence, Rule is, therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b) in both the applications. 7. Both the matters are remanded back to the learned Magistrate for proceeding further in accordance with the law laid down by this court in the aforesaid two cases. (B.R.GAVAI, J.)