Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) The instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 8.4.2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh in Complaint Case No. 391 of 2012 (13 of 2012), titled as "M/s. Jua Trading Company v. Keshari Vanaspati Products Ltd., Jaipur ".
(2.) The respondent No. 2 filed a complaint in the year 2002 against the Firm Keshari Vanaspati Products Ltd. and its partners Vijay Seth the petitioner No. 3 herein and Sanjay Seth in relation to the dishonour of a cheque for a amount of Rs.26,61,734/-.The Trial Court has spent precious time of a about 10 years in the case to effect service of the complaint on the accused No. 4 Sanjay Seth, who is none other than the petitioner No. 3s brother. Ultimately, when despite repeated efforts, the accused No. 4 could not be served, the Court feeling the need to carry on with the proceedings, declared the accused Sanjay Seth to be at absconder and issued a standing bailable warrant against him. The Court separated the proceedings of the complaint qua the petitioners by order dated 8.4.2010. The petitioners, who luckily enough are reported to be participating in the trial, have now assailed the order dated 8.4.2010 by way of the instant misc. petition.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance on the judgment passed by the Court in the case of Patodia Oil Mill & Anr. v. Prasanna Kumar Surana & Ors., reported in 2007 (2) CrLR (Raj.) 1438 and urges that the separation of the proceedings against the petitioners was uncalled for. He submits that unless and until the remaining partner of the firm is served, the trial cannot proceed against the petitioners separately.;