IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL REVISION NO.07 OF 2005 Sanjay Mathur & two others ……… Revisionists Versus Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun & two others. ………Respondents. Dated: June 27, 2008 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. Heard Ms. Seema Sirohi, learned counsel for the revisionists and Sri Harish Pujari, learned Addl. GA for the State/respondent no.1 as well as Ms. Anjali Noliyal, holding brief of Sri Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 & 3, are present. This criminal revision preferred under Section 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.) is directed against the judgment and order dated 05.07.2004 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in Complaint Case No.501/2004 Omprakash Mathur Vs. Sanjay Mathur, whereby the revisionists were summoned under Sections 323/504/506/452/448 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as I.P.C.). Learned counsel for the revisionists fairly submitted that in view of the judgment laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of Adalat Prasad Vs. Jindal and others, reported in (2004) 7 S.C.C., 338” the revision is not maintainable against the summoning order. Hence, she prayed that she may be permitted to withdraw the present revision with liberty to avail appropriate remedy before appropriate forum. Therefore, the revision is dismissed as not pressed with liberty to the revisionists to avail appropriate remedy before appropriate forum. Interim order dated 19.01.2005 passed by this Court automatically stands vacated. [ Dharam Veer, J 27.06.2008 Arti