1 cr­apl­3048­10 jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.APPLN. NO. 3048 OF 2010 Shankarlal Menghrajmal Chugh and Ors. ..Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ..Respondents .... Mr. O.A.Siddiqui Adv. for applicants Mr. V.N.Tayade Adv. for respondent no.2 Mr.S.A.Shaikh APP for State .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 2, 2010 P.C.: 1 Leave to amend granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. 2 Heard the learned advocate for the applicant-original accused nos. 3 to 8, learned advocate for the respondent no.2-original complainant and the learned APP for the State. 3 The applicant is seeking quashing of the order dated 16.6.2009 passed by the learned Magistrate in RCC No.352 of 2009 2 cr­apl­3048­10 which is pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate F.C. Thane. By the said order, the learned Magistrate issued process against the applicant under Section 494 read with section 34 of IPC and under Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act. 4 No doubt the applicants can directly approach this Court against the order of the Magistrate issuing process. However, the Supreme Court in Amar Nath and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana and Ors. AIR 1977 SC 2185 and in Dhariwal Tobacco Products Ltd. and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr. AIR 2009 S.C. 1032, has observed that order issuing process in not an interlocutory order. Thus, as it is not an interlocotory order, revision against the order of the Magistrate issuing process is maintainable. Hence, liberty is granted to the applicants to move the Sessions Court for the reliefs sought in this application. 5 To enable the applicants to approach the concerned Sessions Court, the trial is stayed upto 24.9.2010. In case, the applicants approach the Sessions Court, the applicants shall give notice to the otherside. 6 All contentions are left open. 3 cr­apl­3048­10 7 Application is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]