1. Parties through their counsel.

2. The present writ petition has been filed against the summons issued under section 161 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 dated 29.10.2013 and 2.11.2013 by the Senior Inspector of police Economic Offence Singh, Unit III, Crime Branch, CID Police Office, Compound Erawford Marg, Mumbai.

3. The facts of the case reveal that some criminal case has been registered against certain individuals for the offence under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of IPC and notices have been issued under section 160 of CrPC to the present petitioner to appear before the respondent No.2 at Mumbai.

4. Shri Sethi, learned sernior counsel at the outset has drawn the attention of this Court towards section 160 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and his contention is that the witness cannot be called to Mumbai in light of the statutory provisions of law. To buttress his argument, he has placed reliance upon a judgment delivered by the Gauhati High Court in thge case of M/s. Pusma Investment Pvt.Ltd. and others v. State of Meghalaya and others [2010 Cr.LJ 56].

5. On the other hand, it has been argued by learned counsel for the respondent No.2 before this Court that the peti