12. cr wp 1917-09.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1917 OF 2009 Sudha Ravi .. Petitioner Vs Nazir Mohammed Hussain & Anr .. Respondents Mr. Harihar Bhave i/b M/s. Bhave & Co for the Petitioner Mr. Ganesh Gole for Respondent No. 1 Ms. A.A. Mane, APP for the State CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 5th OCTOBER, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner-original accused, learned advocate for respondent no. 1-original complainant and learned APP for the State. 2. Respondent no.1-original complainant had filed a complaint against the petitioner-original accused who was Assistant General Manager of State Bank of India at the relevant time. The complaint is under Sections 217, 409, 465 and 463 of IPC. It is now numbered as 839/S/2001 and it is pending before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate 9th Court, Bandra, Mumbai. 3. The learned advocate for the petitioner states that he is 1 12. cr wp 1917-09.doc pressing only for quashing of NBW issued against the petitioner by learned ACMM by order dated 23rd April 2009 and quashing of order dated 15th June 2009 passed by the learned ACMM whereby proclamation came to be issued against the petitioner. Learned advocate for the petitioner states that except these two reliefs, he is not pressing for any other reliefs in the present petition and he seeks liberty to move for appropriate relief before the appropriate forum in respect of other prayers. Liberty as prayed for is granted, hence, this petition is being considered only in respect of order dated 23rd April 2009 whereby NBW came to be issued and order dated 15th June 2010 whereby proclamation came to be issued by the learned ACMM. 4. Learned advocate for the petitioner stated that the petitioner being a bank official, she was posted by the bank at Washington. As she was posted in Washington, she was not able to attend the Court of learned ACMM in the said case, hence, above two orders issuing NBW and proclamation came to be passed against the petitioner. 5. Learned advocate for the petitioner stated that the petitioner has now been posted back to Mumbai, hence, there is no impediment for the petitioner to attend the trial Court. The learned advocate for the petitioner on instructions assures the court that henceforth, the 2 12. cr wp 1917-09.doc petitioner will be represented by an advocate on all dates before the trial Court and in addition, the petitioner will also remain present on all the dates before the trial Court. In view of the assurance given to the Court, the orders dated 23rd April 2009 and 15th June 2009 are set aside. It is clarified that if the petitioner cannot attend the trial Court on account of some serious difficulty, it would be open to the petitioner to prefer an application for exemption, which the learned Magistrate will consider on its own merits, in accordance with law. 6. Petition is disposed of in above terms. [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] 3 12. cr wp 1917-09.doc 4