95-WP-3917-2019.doc Shubhada S Kadam IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3917 OF 2019 Kapil Trehan Versus The State of Maharashtra and anr. _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Vikram Chaudhary, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Aditya Mithe, Mr. Sachin Agawane and Ms. Esha Joshi, Advocates for the Applicant. Mr. B. B.Kulkarni, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Amit Ghag, Advocate for Respondent No.2. _________________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 4th MARCH, 2026. P.C. : 1. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for respondent-State and learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The challenge in this petition is to the issue process order dated 20th August 2018 passed in C.C.No.6894/SS/2018 by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 33rd Court at Ballard Pier, Mumbai. 3. It is contention of learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the learned Metropolitan Magistrate has passed a cryptic order, without going through the record and without application of mind. Hence, requested to allow the petition. 4. It is contention of learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the compliant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.03.06 11:09:27 +0530 95-WP-3917-2019.doc Shubhada S Kadam against the petitioner. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate has passed a well reasoned order, no interference is required in it and requested to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Learned APP submitted that appropriate order be passed. 6. I have heard all learned counsel, perused the impugned order, which reads thus : “Perused the complaint along with affidavit of verification and pre-cognizance evidence with documents. Gone through the contents of complaint. It appears that, the complainant has complied all necessary formalities before filing the complaint. The complaint is within limitation. Hence, the order :- ORDER Issue process against Accused for the offence punishable u/s.138 rI/w.141 of N. I. Act on P. F., returnable on 17/11/2018”. 7. It is contention of learned counsel of the applicant that this order is passed without application of mind. Whereas it is contention of learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the order is passed after perusing the affidavit of evidence filed by the complainant. Though learned Magistrate has mentioned that he has passed the order after perusal of the affidavit of evidence filed by the complainant, in my view, the learned Magistrate should have mentioned about the details of the transactions 95-WP-3917-2019.doc Shubhada S Kadam between the petitioner and respondent No.2. Learned Magistrate should have mentioned about the dates of dishonour of cheques, demand notice issued by respondent No.2 to the petitioner but no such details are mentioned in the issue process order. Hence, I deem it fit to remand this case back to the learned Magistrate to pass fresh issue process order after considering the pre-cognizance evidence produced on record. 8. In view of above, I pass following order : O R D E R (i) The writ petition is partly allowed. (ii) The issue process order dated 20th August 2018 passed in C.C.No.6894/SS/2018 by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 33rd Court at Ballard Pier, Mumbai, is quashed and set-aside. (iii)The matter is remanded back to learned Magistrate, 3rd Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai, for passing fresh issue process order. (iv) All contentions of both parties are kept open. (v) The Trial Court is requested to expedite the proceedings as the matter is very old. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)