APPLN.1416-10 & 995-10 - 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1416 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 995 OF 2010 Mr. Kailash N. Agarwal ...Applicant Vs. Global Trade Finance Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents *** Mr. Pranav Badhika with Nevile Master i/b Crawfor Bayley & Co. for the Applicant. Mr. Yashpal Thakur i/b Paras Kuhad & Associates, for Respondent No.1. Mrs. P. P. Bhosale, APP for Respondent No.2. *** CORAM: V. M. KANADE J. DATE : AUGUST 13, 2010 P.C. 1. Both these applications are accordingly disposed of by this common order since the parties in these applications are same. The applicants in both the applications are challenging the orders of issuance of process passed by the learned Magistrate on a complaint filed by the respondent No.1 under S. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. APPLN.1416-10 & 995-10 - 2 - 2. It is submitted that the applicants were no longer directors of the Company on the date on which the cheques were issued, which have been bounced subsequently. It is submitted that firstly, the learned Magistrate, therefore, ought to have postponed the issuance of process and ascertained this fact; and secondly, the verification which has been recorded by the learned Magistrate and on the basis of which the process is issued, is not in accordance with the guidelines laid down by this Court in the case of - Amarnath B. Gupta & Anr. Vs. Mohini Organics Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. [2009 ALL MR (Cri) 184]. 3. The learned counsel for respondent No.1, on the other hand, submitted that this fact would have to be decided, as far as the first submission is concerned. The learned counsel further submits that the said question will have to be decided by the trial Court after evidence is led by both the parties. So far as second submission is concerned, he relied upon judgment of this Court wherein the provisions of S. 202 Cr.P.C. was held not mandatory but directory. 3. In my view, it would be appropriate if the matter is remanded back to the Magistrate, since perusal of the verification recorded by the learned Magistrate squarely reveals that the learned Magistrate has not followed the guidelines of this Court in the case of APPLN.1416-10 & 995-10 - 3 - Amarnath B. Gupta (cited supra), the order of issuance of process is therefore, set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial Court. The trial Court shall record afresh verification of the complaint, in accordance with the guidelines laid down by this Court in the aforesaid judgment and all other questions are kept open. The verification may be recorded by the learned Magistrate within a period of 4 weeks from today. Both these applications are accordingly disposed of in above terms. [ V. M. KANADE J.]