1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2694 OF 2009 Santosh S/o.Ramdas Bobade, APPLICANT VERSUS Vilas S/o.Shivaji Gadkar RESPONDENT Mr.R.V.Naiknavare, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.V.D.Salunkhe, learned counsel for respondent. WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2953 OF 2009 Santosh S/o.Ramdas Bobade APPLICANT VERSUS Shivaji S/o.Vithalrao Gadkar RESPONDENT Mr.R.V.Naiknavare, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.V.D.Salunkhe, learned counsel for respondent. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 23/11/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present applications, the applicant who is an accused in SCC No.236/2009 and SCC No.237/2009 on the file of J.M.F.C.Kalamb has prayed for quashing and setting aside the 2 impugned order by which the J.M.F.C.Kalamb has taken a cognizance of the complaint lodged by the respondents in both these applications u/s. 138 of The N.I.Act and issued process against the present applicant, who is arrayed as an accused in both the complaints. 2. Heard advocate for applicant followed by the submissions of learned counsel for the respondents in both the petitions. During the course of submissions across the bar, my attention is drawn towards the contents of paragraph no.3 of the complaint as to whether cheque was issued by the applicant who is arrayed as an accused in both the complaints and on which bank. It appears from these contents that the transaction took place at Osmanabad and the cheque was drawn at Osmanabad Co-operative Central Bank, Branch Sawargaon, Tal. Tuljapur. 3. Relying on the judgment in the matter of Dipti Kumar Mohanty, versus Videocon Industries Ltd., reported in 2009(5) Mh.L.J. 273 and the reliance is placed on the observation in para no.13 therein. After going through the judgment, all the parties agreed that without prejudice to their rights, the respondents will take back the complaint lodged in the Court of J.M.F.C.Kalamb and will file the same in the Court of J.M.F.C. / C.J.M. At Osmanabad. In view of this statement made by learned advocate appearing for the respondent, learned counsel appearing for the applicant not pressed for the separate order on these applications. In the premise, both 3 these applications stand disposed of with following order : O R D E R 1. The Statement made by learned advocate appearing for the respondents in both the applications that the respondent will take back the complaints lodged in the Court of J.M.F.C. Kalamb, bearing SCC No.236/2009 and SCC No.237/2009 with permission to lodge the same in the Court of J.M.F.C. / C.J.M. Osmanabad, this statement made across the bar by learned advocate appearing for respondents is accepted as an undertaking of the respondent. 2. In view of this statement/undertaking, leave to withdraw the present applications. 3. Applications stand disposed of accordingly. 4. It is clarified that in case any application is moved on behalf of respondents on the ground of delay, the delay to be condoned in view of this order passed in both these applications. 6. It is also made clear that this application is not decided on merit. All the contentions are kept open without prejudice to the rights of parties concerned. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/NOV 2009/cri.appl.2694-09