1 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3082 OF 2009 Ratna H. Punjabi & ors .. Petitioner. -versus State of Maharashtra & anr .. Respondent. Mr. Niranjan Mundargi, for the applicant Mr. A. S. Shitole, Adv for the State Mr Ashok K. Wanwari, for respondent No.2. alongwith WRIT PETITION NO.3083 OF 2009 Shri M. N. Mudiraj .. Petitioner. -versus State of Maharashtra & anr .. Respondent. Mr. Sachin Shintre, , for the applicant Mr. A. S. Shitole, Adv for the respondent Mr. Ashok K. Wanwari, for respondent No.2 WRIT PETITION NO.3084 OF 2009 Shri S.C. Shrivastava & anr Petitioner. -versus State of Maharashtra & anr .. Respondent. Mr. Randhir Singh, for the applicant Mr. A. S. Shitole, Adv for the respondent 2 Mr. Ashok K. Wanwari, for respondent No.2 CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATED: 23rd March, 2010 P.C. 1. The petitioners are challenging the order passed by the Special Judge, TADA Court, Mumbai by which it was pleased to allow the revision application and set aside the order passed by the learned Magistrate, who had refused who issue investigation under section l56(3) of Cr.Pro. Code. The learned Sessions Court was pleased to further direct the Magistrate to issue investigation under section l56(3). 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court, in case f Raghu Raj Singh Rousha v. Shivam Sundram Promoters (2009) 2 SCC 363, the said order passed by the Sessions Court, is required to be set aside. 3. The learned counsel, appearing on behalf of respondents has fairly conceded the ratio to be applied in this case. In this view of the matter, the impugned order passed by the Sessions Court in Revision Application No.1025 of 2009, is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the learned Special Judge, Designated Court for BBC under TADA Act, l987. The learned Special Judge, shall hear both the parties and decide the revision 3 application as expeditiously as possible and in any event on or before 30th June, 2010. The Respondent shall implead the petitioner as party respondent in the said proceedings. 4. All the contentions raised by both the parties are kept open. 5. The parties concerned shall appear before the Special Court on 15th April, 2010. 6. No coercive steps be taken against the petitioner till the disposal of the revision application. ( V.M. KANADE, J.)