(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3366 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3366 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3366 OF 2005 ALONGWITH ALONGWITH ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4898 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4898 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4898 OF 2005 ALONGWITH ALONGWITH ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4900 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4900 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4900 OF 2005 ALONGWITH ALONGWITH ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4901 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4901 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4901 OF 2005 ALONGWITH ALONGWITH ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4902 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4902 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4902 OF 2005 ALONGWITH ALONGWITH ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4903 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4903 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4903 OF 2005 Mrs. Malti R. Shah ...Applicant Versus G.P. Doshi and others ...Respondents ..... Mr. Rajendra Rathod i/b Mr. O.A. Siddiqui, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. M.S.Mhambray, APP. in Appln.3366/05. Mr. D.P. Adsule, APP. in Appln.4898/05. Ms. S.V. Gajare, APP. in Appln.4900/05. Mr. Y.S. Shinde, APP. in Appln.4901 & 4902/05. Mr. Rajesh More, APP. in Appln.4903/05. ..... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. DATED: 12TH AUGUST, 2005 DATED: 12TH AUGUST, 2005 DATED: 12TH AUGUST, 2005 P. C.:- P. C.:- P. C.:- 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant has prayed for quashing of process issued against her in Criminal Case Nos. 2192/SS/2005, 2188/SS/2005, 2187/SS/2005, 2186/SS/2005, 2191/SS/2005 and 2190/SS/2005 which are pending in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 33rd Court, Ballard Pier, Bombay. In the (-2-) said case, process has been issued against the applicant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. For the reasons recorded in my order dated 13th June, 2005 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.213 of 2005 and order dated 21st June, 2005 passed in Criminal Application No. 550 of 2005, the applicant has an efficacious remedy of preferring revision against the order of Magistrate issuing process. Hence, in my opinion, it would be appropriate that the applicant prefers revision before the concerned Sessions Court against the order of the Magistrate issuing process. 4. Liberty is granted to the applicant to prefer revision before the concerned Sessions Court. The learned advocate for the applicant states that the necessary revision would be preferred within a period of four weeks from today. 5. On the necessary revision being preferred by the applicant before the concerned Sessions Court, the concerned Sessions Court shall dispose of the same on merits after hearing necessary parties. 6. Applications are disposed of. *****