Heard extensively. These nine petitions deal with common question of law and facts. Hence, by consent, taken together. Heard finally.

2. This is second round of litigation in this Court initiated by the petitioners questioning legality, propriety of orders of issuance of process. In the first round the canvass projected was, in respect of want of service of statutory notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and jurisdictional inquiry under Section 202 (amended provisions) of Cr.P.C. The petitioners by order dated 24.9.2010 failed in the respective criminal applications, same was questioned before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the petitions before the Hon’ble Supreme Court were also dismissed.

3. Mr.Thakore, the learned Counsel for petitioners contended, there could not be multiple proceedings permitted to the bank as a creditor to initiate against the petitioners-the borrower. He states that loan of Rs.12 crores was availed by the petitioners, Rs.6 crores each, and for that purpose indeed there was a memorandum of understanding/ agreement entered into between the bank and the petitioners dated 10.9.2007 which is annexed at pages 37 to 39 of the petiti