-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1511 OF 2005 Mrs.Surjeet Behl w/o Mr. G.S.Behl & Anr. ..Petitioners Vs. Daewoo Anchor Electronics Ltd. & Anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.P.M.Vyas i/b Mr.H.P.Vyas for Petitioner Mr.Rajesh More, A.P.P. for State. ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JUNE 22,2005 DATE : JUNE 22,2005 DATE : JUNE 22,2005 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioner is seeking quashing of process issued by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate Ballard pier, Mumbai in Case No.1737/S/2000. The said case is under Section 138 r.w. 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. For the reasons recorded in my order dated 8th -2- June, 2005 in Cri.Application No. 645 of 2005 and order dated 13th June, 2005 in W.P.No. 213 of 2005, in my view, it is clear that the petitioner has an efficacious remedy of preferring revision against the order of Magistrate issuing process. Hence, in my view, it would be appropriate that the petitioner prefers a revision before the concerned Sessions Court against the order of the Magistrate issuing process. 4. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to prefer the necessary revision before the concerned Sessions Court. Trial Court shall not proceed with the trial till 18th July,2005. 5. On the necessary revision being preferred by the petitioner before the concerned Sessions Court, the concerned Sessions Court shall dispose of the matter on merits after hearing the necessary parties. 6. Writ Petition is disposed of. [V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]