J. P. DESAI, J. ( 1 ) BEFORE parting with this case I am constrained to observe here that the learned Metropolitan Magistrate has very cursorily dealt with the matter and issued bailable warrants against the accused who are again residing far away from Ahmedabad. The allegations made in the complaint per se show that the dispute is of a purely civil nature. The complaint does not disclose as to what were the dates of transactions on what dates the respective payments were made and on what date the complain was being filed. Such details are missing. The verification recorded by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 200 of the Code is also very perfunctory. Accused No. 1 carries on business at Calcutta accused No. 2 at Jodhpur while it is not stated as to at what 776 place accused No. 3 was carrying on business. The verification shows that the merchants from Madras had gone to Ramesh Patel the complainant and purchased the machinery. The verification does not show that these accused had personally gone to the complainant Ramesh Patel. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate while recording the verification should have taken pains to gather the details from the complainant before issuing process. He should have considered as to how he could pin-point that the accused were the persons who had gone for placing the order when it is stated in the verification that merchants from Madras had gone when none of the accused is said to be residing or carrying on business in Madras. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate seems to have issued process without applying his mind to the facts of the case. The action on the part of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate in issuing process in the present case shows that there was complete non-application of mind on his part. He should not have issued process without gathering necessary details from the complainant while recording his verification. ( 2 ) I have found in many cases that parties approached Criminal Courts for settling disputes which on the face of it appeared to be purely of a civil nature and the Magistrate without proper application of mind issued process with the result that this Court is flooded with applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for quashing the proceedings. This is not the first case of this type in which parties approached the Criminal Court for settling the dispute of a purely civil nature and the Magistrate after examining the complainant in a perfunctory manner issued process and bailable warrants against the accused. It is high time that when a complaint is presented before a Magistrate he carefully reads the same and then examines the complainant so as to gather necessary details from him during that examination under Section 200 of the Cri. Pro. Code. 1973. He should examine him with a view to find out whether the dispute is purely of a civil nature or whether the complaint on the face of it discloses a criminal offence. He should issue process only if the contents of the complaint and the examination of the complainant under Section 200 of the Code prima facie make out a criminal offence against the accused. In cases of this type where the complaint has come to be filed as a result of some transactions between the parties which transaction is on the face of it of a civil nature efforts should be made by the Magistrate while examining the complainant on oath to find out whether there was any writing or writings made at the time of the transaction and whether there was any exchange of correspondence after the transaction and to ask the complainant to produce the same and other relevant documents if any which will give an idea as to what is the say of the other party which again will go a long way in ascertaining whether the dispute is purely of a civil nature and the complaint is filed simply with a view to harass and bring pressure upon the accused. When there are more than one accused efforts should be made to find out whether there is material qua particular accused. If the much care is exercised by the Magistrate then complaints which need not be entertained will be thrown out at the initial stage and the persons against whom such complaints are filed will not be harassed and put to unnecessary inconvenience and expenses and much of the time of this Court in hearing such applications for quashing the proceedings will also be saved. They should also seriously consider whether in such cases a summons will serve the purpose and issue warrants 777 only if it appears that summons will not serve the purpose. Rule made absolute .