1 APL 132-2011 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.132 OF 2011 M/s.J.M.Baxi & Co. & anr. .Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra & ors .Respondents Mr.Niranjan Mundargi, Advocate, for the Applicants Mrs.A.A.Mane, APP, for Respondent No.1  State Mrs.Usha Kejariwal, Advocate, for Respondent No.2 CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 1ST MARCH, 2011 P.C. . Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2. The learned Counsel for the applicants states that without directing issuance of process, the learned Magistrate caused summons to be issued and asked the applicants to furnish solvent sureties which they have done. If that be so, it is not clear as to why the learned Magistrate insisted upon presence of 2 APL 132-2011 the applicants if no order directing issuance of process has been passed. The learned Magistrate could first pass order of issuing process and only then insist upon presence of the applicants. 3. Stand over to 15th March, 2011. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)