1 appw-450-10 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 450 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1358 OF 2009 Susheel Sharma ..Applicant Vs. K. Ramakrishna and ors. ..Respondents Mr. Prakash Shetty for applicant. Mr. S.J. Chourasia i/by M/s. Ashoka Law Firm for respondent no.1. Mrs.M.M. Deshmukh, APP for State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & R. Y. GANOO, JJ. February 21, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. This Criminal Application has been taken out by Mr. Susheel Sharma, respondent no.3 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 1358 of 2009 and he prays for recall of our order dated 9/12/2009 to the extent of interim 2 appw-450-10 relief granted in terms of prayer clause (b). 3. The Present applicant has lodged a complaint with the Sakinaka Police Station at Mumbai and the same came to be registered as C.R. No. 344 of 2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 471, 472, 420 read with Section 34 of IPC. The said complaint mainly relates to alleged offence of forged or concocted renewal of the bank guarantee for the period from 29/3/2006 to 5/7/2006. The said complaint has nothing to do with the dishonour of any cheque and more particularly issued from Account No. 57019527655 with the State Bank of Hyderabad, Jaipur. 4. While granting interim relief by our order dated 9/12/2009, we have referred to the complaint filed by M/s. Kisan Irrigation Limited for the offences punishable under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1888 and the said complaint has no relevance to the prayer made in the petition i.e. for quashing of C.R. No. 344 of 2008. Hence, the interim order passed by us on 9/12/2009 is required to be vacated. 3 appw-450-10 5. In the result, the application is allowed and the order dated 9/12/2009, to the extent of granting interim relief, is hereby recalled. 6. Rule is made absolute accordingly. (R. Y. GANOO,J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)