1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2004 OF 2010 M/s. Sandeep Trading Company and Ors. ...Applicants. v/s. The State and Anr. ...Respondents. Mr. M.S.Mohite i/by Shri Chaitanya Pendse ,advs. For the Applicants. Mr. V.B.Konde Deshmukh, APP for the Respondent No.1/State. Smt. Vasanti Joshi, adv. For the R.No.2. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : APRIL 28, 2011. P.C. 1 This application is filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. by the original accused challenging the issuance of process by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Andheri on the complaint filed by the respondent no.2. 2 On perusal of the record, it appears that the complainant is partnership firm situated at Vile-Parle, Bombay. Accused persons are situated in Kolkata. Case was under Sections 406, 418 and 420 r/w section 34 of the I.P.C. It also appears that the complainant filed his verification statement of 18th August, 2008 alongwith the complaint and the learned Magistrate immediately passed an order to issue process against all the accused persons. Sub-section (1) of Section 202 of the 2 Cr.P.C., as amended with effect from 23.6.2006, mandates that where the accused is residing at a place beyond the area in which the Magistrate exercises his jurisdiction, Magistrate shall postpone the issue of process against the accused and either enquire into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit, for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding. It is now settled that this provision is mandatory as far as postponement of process is concerned against the accused persons not residing within the territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate issuing process . In the present case, all the accused persons are residing in Kolkata which is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Magistrate at Andheri. Therefore, it was necessary for the learned Magistrate to postpone issuance of process till appropriate enquiry was made to find out whether it was was necessary to issue process. 3 In view of the facts and legal position, without entering into merits of the case, the impugned order is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate with direction that he shall make appropriate enquiry as required under Section 202(1) of the Cr.P.C. before taking decision as to whether process be or be not issued against the accused persons. Magistrate shall 3 not be influenced by any observations made by himself or by the Sessions Court while taking decision. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)