[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.325 OF 2007 Shri.Vasudeo Daji Kulkarni and Anr. ..Petitioners Vs. Sudhir Vishnupant Deshpande & Anr. ..Respondents ... Smt.Rewa Nargolkar Advocate for Petitioners Ms.S.V.Gajare A.P.P. for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : FEBRUARY 23, 2007 DATE : FEBRUARY 23, 2007 DATE : FEBRUARY 23, 2007 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 petitiners are seeking quashing of process issued by the learned Judicial Magistrate F.C. Pimpri, Pune in R.C.C.No.646 of 2006. In the said case process is issued under Sections 420 and 440 read with Section 34 of IPC. 3. However, for the reasons recorded in the order passed by this Court in the case of V.K.Jain Vs. V.K.Jain Vs. V.K.Jain Vs. P.V.Padode; 2005(3) Mh.L.J.778, P.V.Padode; 2005(3) Mh.L.J.778, P.V.Padode; 2005(3) Mh.L.J.778, I am of the [-2-] opinion that 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 prefer a revision before the concerned Sessions Court against the order of the Magistrate issuing process. 4. Liberty is granted to the petitioners to prefer the necessary revision before the concerned Sessions Court. The learned advocate for the petitioners makes a statement that the necessary revision will be preferred within four weeks from today. In view of this statement, the trial Court shall not proceed with the trial for a period of four weeks. 5. On the necessary revision being preferred by the petitioners before the concerned Sessions Court, the concerned Sessions Court shall dispose of the matter on merits after hearing the necessary parties. 6. Writ Petition is disposed of. [-3-] [V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]