[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL W.P.NO.102 OF 2007 Shri.Padmanabham Rangarajan and Anr. ..Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents ... Mr.Sanjiv Panalekar with Ms.Janhavi Lanjekar i/b PRS Legal for Petitioners Mr.A.S.Shitole A.P.P. for the State Mr. K.C.Nichani Adv. for respondent no.2 ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : NOVEMBER 18, 2008 DATE : NOVEMBER 18, 2008 DATE : NOVEMBER 18, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioners-original accused, the learned advocate for the respondent no.2-original complainant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioners are facing prosecution in CC No.971/SS/2006 which is pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 6th Court, Mazgaon, Mumbai. The said case is under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioners had preferred application for permanent exemption [-2-] before the learned Magistrate. By order dated 29.12.2008, the learned Magistrate rejected the said application, hence, this petition. 3. It is seen that the petitioner no.2 is a lady. Both the petitioners are residing in Chennai. Looking to these facts and the facts of the case, the trial court shall grant exemption from personal appearance to the petitioners unless the Magistrate is of the opinion that the presence of the petitioners is absolutely necessary. In such case, on notice being given to the petitioners, the petitioners shall remain present on the said date. 4. Petition is disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]