-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1315 OF 2005 Rampratap Ramjeevan Baheti and Anr. ..Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents ... Mr. A.B.Vagyani, Advocate for Petitioners Mr. Y.S.Shinde, 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 : JULY 12,2005 DATE : JULY 12,2005 DATE : JULY 12,2005 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 are seeking quashing of process issued by the learned learned J.M.F.C. Jaysingpur in S.C.C. No. 493 of 2001 and Regular Criminal Case No.44 of 2003. In the said case, the process was issued under Sections 420, 409, 406 r.w. 34 of IPC by order dated 27.5.2003. 3. For the reasons recorded in my order dated 13th June, 2005 in W.P.No. 213 of 2005 and dated 21st -2- June, 2005 in Cri.Application No.550 of 2005, 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.]