IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. 126-M of 2006 Date of decision: 13.02.2008 Narinder Singh and others ..... Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present:- Mr. Balwinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. R.D. Sharma,DAG, Haryana Mr. Vikas Bahl, Advocate for respondent No.2. VINOD K. SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed to quash the complaint and the summoning order dated 3.08.2005 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pehowa in the complaint filed by respondent No.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent- complainant, has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the plea that order of issuance of process by the learned Magistrate is revisable being a final order. In support of this contention, the learned counsel for the respondent placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Crl. Misc. No. 126-M of 2006 --2-- Supreme Court in case of Rajendra Kumar Sitaram Pande and others vs. Uttam and another (1999)3 Supreme Court Cases 134 . The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contends that in the present case complaint was dismissed in default, which was wrongly restored and the order of restoration being without jurisdiction, the summoning order could not have been passed and is, therefore, liable to be set aside by this Court in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is settled law that where there is specific provision under this code, power under Section 482 Cr. P. C. cannot be exercised. As revision is prescribed against summoning order, the petitioner may avail the said remedy. In view of the fact that the petitioner has been prosecuting his case in this Court since December 2005, the petitioner is given liberty to approach the learned Sessions Judge, by filing the revision within a period of one month from today. In case the revision is filed within the aforesaid period, the same shall be decided on merits. Disposed of. February 13 , 2008 ( VINOD K. SHARMA ) Dinesh JUDGE