1 cri wp 1737 of 2010 hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITOIN NO. 1737 OF 2010 Mr. Afrox Yusuf Lokhandwala ... Petitioner Versus Mr. Mohammed Imran Ali Mohammed and Anr. ... Respondents Mr. Mishra, holding for Mr. A.M. Sarogi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. U.V. Kejriwal, A.P.P. for State. CORAM : SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA,J. DATED : NOVEMBER 24, 2010 P.C. 1. This writ petition is filed to challenge the order dated 13th April 2010 passed by the Sessions Court, Mumbai rejecting the Criminal Revision Application filed by the petitioner against the order of issuance of process by the trial Court under section 504 and 506 of I.P.C. 2. The respondent was married to one Ms. Huma D/o. Ahmed Gormay somewhere in the year 1999 according to Muslim rites. It was a love marriage. There is one girl child born from the said wedlock. It appears that since the year 2004, wife of the respondent developed love affair with petitioner while he was in Mumbai and 2 cri wp 1737 of 2010 both had extra marital relations. Petitioner has since gone to England, for his study and work. The respondent alleges that in the month of July, 2008 he realized that his wife was intending to run away with the petitioner and to get married to him. She desired that respondent gives her Khulanama (relieving from the marriage) to her. When the respondent sought to speak to the petitioner, he abused him in filthy language and threatened him. It is further alleged that on 30th October, 2008 when he was proceeding towards his house, his wife and petitioner suddenly accosted him and abused him on the road in public place in filthy language. Mr. Mishra, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no material whatever or evidence produced by the respondent in support of the allegations made in the complaint. Therefore, the trial Court ought not to have issued process. 3. The record shows that verification statement of the respondent was recorded in which he has stated all the details stated in the complaint. On considering the averments in the complaint and verification, the trial court concluded that prima facie case has been made out to issue process and accordingly process was issued. Perusal of the complaint as also the statement of verification justifies the order of issuance of process. The Sessions Court therefore, was right in dismissing the revision application preferred against the order of issuance of process. Hence, writ petition is dismissed. (SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA,J.)