Jindal Drugs Private Limited Through Aditya Khetan v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

Digitally signed by CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Date:

2025.01.22 23:42:23 +0530 CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Chitra Sonawane 903-WP-5859-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Cri.Writ Petition No.5859 of 2024 Jindal Drugs Private Limited through authorised representative Aditya Khetan, a private limited company, having its registered office at 12A, 12th floor, Bakhtawar building, 229, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 ...

Petitioner.

Versus

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Mumbai 2.

Vijay Shrikrishan Jindal, aged about 62 years, residing at Tahnee Heights Coop.Hsg Society Ltd, Flat No.174, 17 floor, Petit Hall, D building, 66, Nepean Sea Road, Mumbai400006.

.... Respondents.

--- Ms Fereshte Sethna a/w Mr Ameya Pant, Coral Shah i/by DMD Advocates for the petitioner.

Ms MR Tidke, APP for respondent No.1/State.

Mr Aabad Ponda, Sr.Advocate a/w Ms Shachi Udeshi, Mr Sujith Mavi i/by Wadia Ghandy & Co. for respondent No.2. --- Page No. 1 of 3

Chitra Sonawane 903-WP-5859-2024.doc Coram : R.N.Laddha, J.

Date : 22 January 2025.

P.C. :

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

The petitioner in this petition, has been arraigned as an accused in a private complaint filed by respondent No.2. The complaint led to issuance of process for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, ('NI Act'), 1881.

3.

The established legal principle is that this Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction u/s 482 sparingly, specifically when the petitioner has alternative and effective remedy of filing a revision before the Sessions Court to challenge the process issuance order. In these circumstnces, this Court is not inclined to invoke its inherent jurisdiction, however, if the revision fails, the petitioner is not precluded from approaching this Court under Section 482 CrPC. 4.

In light of the above, this Court is not inclined to invoke the inherent jurisdiction. The petition stand dismissed. The petitioner is granted liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the Sessions Court. Page No. 2 of 3

Chitra Sonawane 903-WP-5859-2024.doc Furthermore, the petitioner may seek condonation of delay, if any.

5.

It is made clear that this Court has not examined the merits of these cases and all contentions of the parties are kept open.

[ R. N. Laddha,J. ] Page No. 3 of 3