1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3076 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3077 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3078 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3079 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3080 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3081 OF 2009 Jaylon Impex India Pvt. Ltd. ... Petitioner. V/s. M/s. Krishna Trading Company & Ors. M/s. Sukhasagar International Tarachand Sharma HUF & Ors. M/s. Pradeep Kumar Nirmal Kumar & Ors. M/s. Meenu Exim Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. M/s. Bhagavati Ready Made Corporation & Ors. M/s. Nirmal Polyster Pvt.Ltd & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey i/b. Yogesh Yagnik for the Petitioner. Ms. R.V. Newton, APP for the Respondents. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 10th FEBRUARY 2010. P.C. :- In all these matters under challenge is an order passed by the Revisional Court by which the learned Magistrate has been directed by the Sessions Court to abide by the mandate of Section 202(1) of Cr.P.C. and hold an Inquiry thereunder. 2 2. This order is dated 22nd July 2009 and it reverses that of the Trial Court dated 23rd July 2008. 3. The Revisional Court has noted that Respondent No.2 - Applicant/Accused before it are all residing in the State of Gujarat and more particularly, at Surat. They being beyond the jurisdiction of the concerned Magistrate, he has been directed to abide by the amended Section 202(1) of Cr.P.C. 4. No fault could be found with this direction and more particularly, when I have taken a view on 8th January 2010 in Criminal Application No. 2640 of 2009 (Capt. S.C. Mathur V/s. M/s. Elektronik Lab. & Ors.) that Section 202(1) of Cr.P.C. as amended is mandatory. Therefore, the learned Magistrate is obliged to postpone the issuance of process and hold an inquiry in cases where the accused are residing beyond the limits over which he exercises the jurisdiction. It is admitted that the accused are residing beyond the jurisdiction of the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate, 12th Court, Bandra Mumbai. The learned Magistrate having not abided by this mandate, there is no error in directing him to comply with the law. In these circumstances, the orders under challenge do not suffer from any infirmity or error of jurisdiction so as to call for interference by this Court. The Revision Applications are devoid of any merits and are summarily dismissed. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)