1 crappw247­11common rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURSIDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 247 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2535 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 248 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2533 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 249 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2534 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 250 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2532 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 251 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2531 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders. ..... Mr. C. K. Talekar i/b. M/s. L. J. Law for the applicant. Mr. M. G. Shukla h/f. Mr. Girish Kulkarni for respondent No.1. Mr. K. V. Saste, APP for respondent No.2. ..... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 16, 2011. P.C.: The prayer in these applications is for 2 crappw247­11common recalling the order dated 6th January, 2011. By the said order, the writ petitions filed by the contesting respondents in these Criminal Applications were admitted for final hearing and interim relief was granted. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant was heard at the time of passing the said order. The applicant in these applications is the complainant in private complaints filed before the learned Magistrate. By an order dated 6th January, 2011, writ petitions were admitted for final hearing and proceedings of the complaint were stayed. 2. The order of admission cannot be recalled. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant prays for vacating the interim relief. 3. One of the grounds of challenge in the writ petitions is that provision of Sub Section 1 of Section 202 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1973 as amended has not been followed. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant could not dispute that on the issue whether the amended provision is mandatory or 3 crappw247­11common directory, there is a conflict of views expressed by the learned Judges of this Court. 5. Unless the conflict is resolved, the interim relief granted in the petitions cannot be vacated. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant prays for expediting the hearing of the writ petitions. 7. Very old criminal matters are pending in this Court where accused are in jail. Therefore, no priority can given to the writ petition of the year 2010 as of today. 8. Hence, applications are rejected. (A.S.OKA, J.)