ORDER
Fakhruddin, J.
1. Heard.
2. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for quashing the criminal proceedings in a complaint case pending before the A.C.J.M., Raipur on the ground that it is abuse of process of the Court.
3. The Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, has been joined as party where the matter is pending. Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Dy. A.G. submits that the petitioner has not shown any ground and it is not just and proper for the petitioner to join the A.C.J.M. as party respondent where the matter has been taken cognizance and the petitioner has wrongly joined the A.C.J.M. as respondent No. 2.
4. It is noted that the parties are casually being joined without showing reasonable grounds. Counsel for the petitioner is to be very careful and not repeat such mistakes in future. The name of respondent No. 2 be struck of.
5. It is borne out from the record that consequent upon filing of a complaint by respondent No. 1 against the petitioner in the Court of A.C.J.M., Raipur on 20-3-1998 the case has been registered and the matter is pending. The complaint itself goes to show that a cheque dated 10-12-1997 for Rs. 1,13,500/- and another cheque dated 25-12-1997 for Rs. 65,000/- were issued by the applicant in favour of the complainant and on their presentation both the cheques were dishonoured on 17-2-1998 on the ground of insufficiency of funds. Legal notice dated 18-2-1998 was sent to the petitioner and the said notice was replied on 4-3-1998. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Court below was not justified in entertaining the complaint and it is the abuse of process of the Court.
6. Complaint has been filed by respondent No. 1 in accordance with the provisions of law and the same has been taken cognizance by the Competent Court. The complainant may have certain defence and the matter is thus being considered and decided. Since the matter is pending before the Competent Court, in the opinion of this Court any finding recorded by this Court may prejudice the cause of the rival parties, as such, under the facts and circumstances of the case, no case is made out for issuance of any order or direction by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, at this stage.
7. However, the Trial Court shall proceed strictly in accordance with law.
8. It is open to the petitioner to raise such defences under the law including one under Negotiable Instruments Act which are available to him before the Court concerned where the trial is pending.
9. Subject to the observations made above, this petition fails and is dismissed.