(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2070 OF 2005 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2070 OF 2005 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2070 OF 2005 Ashok Chopra & Anr ...Petitioners Versus M/s. Prince Multiplast Pvt. Ltd. and Others ...Respondents ..... Mr. S.J. Khera, Advocate for Petitioners Mr. V.B. Konde Deshmukh, A.P.P. for State. ..... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. DATED: 4TH OCTOBER, 2005 DATED: 4TH OCTOBER, 2005 DATED: 4TH OCTOBER, 2005 P. C.:- P. C.:- P. C.:- 1. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioners have prayed for quashing of process issued against them in C. C. No. 99/S/2000 which is pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai. In the said case, process has been issued against the petitioners under Section 420 of I.P.C. 3. For the reasons recorded in the decision of this Court in the case of V.K. Jain & Ors. Vs. Pratap V.K. Jain & Ors. Vs. Pratap V.K. Jain & Ors. Vs. Pratap Vs. Padode and Anr, reported in 2005(3) Mh.L.J. Vs. Padode and Anr, reported in 2005(3) Mh.L.J. Vs. Padode and Anr, reported in 2005(3) Mh.L.J. 778, 778, 778, in my opinion, the petitioners have an efficacious remedy of preferring revision against the order of Magistrate issuing process. Hence, in my view, it would be appropriate that the petitioners (-2-) prefer revision before the concerned Sessions Court against the order of the Magistrate issuing process. 4. Liberty is granted to the petitioners to prefer revision before the concerned Sessions Court. The learned advocate for the petitioners states that the necessary revision would be preferred within a period of four weeks from today. In view of this statement, the trial Court shall not proceed with the trial for a period of four weeks from today. 5. It is also prayed that the learned Magistrate has issued non bailable warrant against the applicants and the said N.B.W. be quashed. I am not inclined to quash the N.B.W. as in my view, it would be appropriate that the applicants prefer an application before the Magistrate for setting aside the said N.B.W. In order to enable the applicants to take necessary steps for setting aside the N.B.W. before the Magistrate, the said N.B.W. are stayed for a period of six weeks from today. 6. On the necessary revision being preferred by the petitioners before the concerned Sessions Court, the concerned Sessions Court shall dispose of the same on merits after hearing necessary parties. 7. Writ Petition is disposed of. (-3-) *****