IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.942 of 2007 1. ASHOK MEHTA 2. UMESH MEHTA 3. MUNNA MEHTA( 1 TO 3 ARE SONS OF SINGHESHWAR MEHTA) 4. MOST. SITA DEVI, WIDOW OF LATE SINGHESHWAR MEHTA 5. MEENA DEVI, WIFE OF ASHOK MEHTA 6. MANI DEVI W/O UMESH MEHTA 7. RINA DEVI W/O MUNNA MEHTA ALL R/O VILL- SISIYA P.S. KORHA, DIST. KATIHAR. --- PETITIONERS. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. MOST. SAVITRI DEVI, WIDOW OF LATE ARUN MEHTA R/O VILL. SISIYA, P.S. KORHA, DIST. KATIHAR. --COMPLAINANT/O.PS For the petitioners : Mr. Ram charitar Singh, Sr. Advocate. For the O.Ps : Mr. Musowir, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ----------- 06. 17.08.2010 Petitioners are proposed accuseds. A complaint was filed which was duly enquired into in terms of Sections 200 and 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure whereafter learned Magistrate found that the same did not disclose any prima facie case and accordingly it was dismissed. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order the complainant preferred revision application vides Cr. Rev. no. 3 of 2007. Learned revisional Court (Sessions Judge, Katihar) by order dated 31-03-2007 disposed of the said revision application. The operative portion of the order culled out in paragraph no.4 read as under:- “4. In the result, this criminal revision application is hereby allowed and the impugned order is hereby set aside. The case is remitted back to the learned lower court with a direction to hear the petitioner complainant afresh on the point of cognizance and to pass proper order in accordance with law on the basis of the materials available on the record, in the light of the observation made 2 above.” Fresh order is yet to be passed. Petitioners are yet to be summoned. The matter has been remanded back to the Court below for passing fresh order in accordance with law and as such this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impugned at the instance of the petitioners who are still in the realm of the proposed accuseds. However, it is observed that learned Magistrate shall pass order in terms of the directions contained in paragraph no. 4 without being prejudiced in any manner by any observation/finding recorded by the learned revisional Court in pre paragraphs. The application is disposed of with above noted observation. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)