ORDER

Tahilramani V.K. (Smt.), J. — Heard both sides.

2.Through this application under section 482 of Cri.P.C., the applicants are seeking quashing of process issued against them under section 406 of I.P.C. by order dated 24-8-2004. The said process has been issued against the applicants in Complaint No. 498/SW/04 which is pending before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 33rd Court, Ballard Estate, Mumbai.

3.However, in my opinion, the applicants have an efficacious remedy i.e. of preferring a revision before the Sessions Court against the order of the Magistrate issuing process. Hence, I expressed the view that it would be appropriate that the applicants prefers revision before the concerned Sessions Court against the order of Magistrate issuing process.

4.On expressing this opinion, the learned Counsel for the applicants pointed out the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of (Adalat Prasad v. Rooplal Jindal & Others.1 The learned Advocate has submitted that in the said decision, it is observed in para 16 that in a case where process has been issued, in the absence of any review power or inherent power with the subordinate Criminal Courts, the reme