1 3360.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3360 OF 2010 Venkadesh-J ...Petitioner Versus Ld.Magistrate Smt.N.N.Sheikh & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Petitioner present in-person. Ms.M.H.Mhatre, A.P.P. for State. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED:- FEBRUARY 1, 2011. P.C. 1. This Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner appears in-person. In the Petition, several reliefs have been claimed. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the petitioner was asked to identify the principal relief that he wants to pursue and would like to be redressed by this Court. 2. In response, the petitioner has stated that his principal grievance is that, the criminal case in which he has been named as accused being Criminal Case No.1345 of 2006 for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has been transferred to some other Court inspite of the fact that the Court had already heard the arguments of both 2 3360.10 sides on interim applications filed in the said proceedings being Exhibit 58, Exhibit 73 and Exhibit 74 respectively as back as in February, 2010. Moreover, when the petitioner received notice from the Court to which the criminal case was transferred, when he appeared before the said Court, he was informed that the case has been re-transferred to some other Court. Presently, the case is transferred to the Court of Shri V.A.Tekewani, Magistrate being Presiding Officer of Evening Court at Thane. 3. The fact that the arguments of both parties were heard on applications Exhibits 58, 73 and 74 does not mean that the main criminal case could not have been transferred to some other Court for administrative exigencies by the Principal Judge. We are not called upon to examine the said aspect of the matter in the present Petition. However, at the same time, we would agree with the Petitioner that uncertainty has been created insofar as the petitioner is concerned as to the matter would proceed before which Court. Since the matter is now assigned to the Court of Shri V.A.Tekewani, Magistrate, Presiding Officer of Evening Court at Thane, in our opinion, the order that we propose to pass would meet the ends of justice. 4. We dispose of this Petition with direction to the concerned Magistrate 3 3360.10 to ensure that all the Miscellaneous Applications pending in the main case assigned to his Court, in particular, Exhibits 58, 73 and 74 are disposed of expeditiously so that the main case can proceed for trial. The petitioner is not aware about the next date of hearing. According to him, the last date of the case before the concerned Magistrate was 13th December, 2010. 5. The petitioner is free to bring this order to the notice of the concerned Magistrate, which, we have no manner of doubt, would take appropriate measures to ensure that the Miscellaneous Applications are listed immediately and proceeded in accordance with law. 6. The said Applications will have to be disposed of expeditiously, as the issue, amongst others, regarding the jurisdiction of the concerned Court has been raised by the Petitioner. After the issue is answered one way or the other, the trial will have to proceed in accordance with law. 7. Petition disposed of on the above terms, as no other relief is pressed at this stage. Ordered accordingly. (A.R.JOSHI, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)