JUDGMENT : The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 18.12.2017 by which process under section 82 Cr.P.C has been issued against him in Complaint Case No. 04 of 2011. 2. Briefly stated, in Complaint Case No. 04 of 2011 which has been filed under section 138 of the N.I Act, 1881 cognizance of the offence was taken on 25.05.2011 and on the petitioner’s appearance before the court below he was granted bail vide order dated 10.06.2014. The petitioner raising a plea on territorial jurisdiction of the Ranchi court in view of the decision in “Dashrath Rup Singh Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra” reported in 2014 (3) JLJR 594 (SC) filed a petition which was allowed on 22.11.2014, however, the complainant did not file the complaint before the court of competent jurisdiction; he has filed Criminal Revision No. 80 of 2015. This revision petition was allowed vide order dated 14.02.2017 but the complainant did not take steps for restoration of the complaint case within time and accordingly, by an order dated 18.07.2017 the proceeding in Complaint Case No. 04 of 2011 was dropped by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Deoghar. The petitioner has asserted that the notice issued to him on restoration of the complaint case was sent to a wrong address which is reflected in order dated 20.11.2017 by which the complainant was directed to furnish fresh address of the petitioner. On 07.12.2017, the day when the complainant has furnished fresh address of the petitioner non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner and on 18.12.2017 process under section 82 Cr.P.C has been issued against him. 3. The impugned orders dated 07.12.2017 and 18.12.2017, when seen in the context of the narration of the proceedings in the complaint case, do not disclose proper application of mind by the Magistrate. Exercise of powers under section 73 Cr.P.C and section 82 Cr.P.C ensue serious consequences; issuance of warrant of arrest or process under section 82 Cr.P.C are serious matters. The Magistrate exercising powers under section 73 Cr.P.C or under section 82 Cr.P.C must record his satisfaction as indicated in section 73/82 Cr.P.C. A perusal of the impugned orders dated 07.12.2017 and 18.12.2017 discloses mechanical exercise of powers by the Magistrate. Accordingly, these orders are quashed. 4. In the result, Cr.M.P No. 216 of 2018 is allowed.