JUDGMENT :

1. Rule, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties made returnable forthwith and heard.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel appearing for the Applicant invites attention of this Court to the averments made in the complaint as also to the verification statement of the complainant and other documents placed on record, and submits that the learned Magistrate has rightly issued process keeping in view the averments of the complaint as also the verification statement of the complainant. It is submitted that without assigning any reasons, why the order of issuance of process is not correct, the Sessions court by a cryptic order set aside the order of issuance of process passed by the learned Magistrate. The learned counsel for the Applicant relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar v/s. State of Maharashtra and ors. [2019(2) Bom. C.R.(Cri) 626] submits that the Apex Court in the facts of that case ruled that, if ingredients of offence alleged against accused are prima facie made out in complaint, criminal proceeding shall not be interdicted. He submits that in the present case the averments in