Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The present petition questions the propriety of order passed on 21.7.2010 on a application filed by the petitioners before the S.D.J.M., Vaishali at Hajipur in G.R. No.3177 of 2003 for stopping the proceeding and discharging the petitioners under section 258 of the Cr. P.C.

2. It appears that the petition was wrongly mentioned to be one under section 239 of the Cr.P.C. The learned S.D.J.M., after hearing the parties, went on to hold that said provision of section 239 of the Cr.P.C. was not applicable to the trial of summons cases by a magistrate under Chapter XX of the Cr.P.C. The plea which has been set up by the petitioners before ,this Court and, which appears submitted before the court below also, was that the quantity of food grains taken together, was not such which could attract the provisions of Essential Commodities Act so as to legitimize the prosecutions of the petitioner in G.R. 3177 of 2003.

3. It is true that section 239 of the Cr. P.C. does not form part of Chapter XX of the Code, it is in Chapter IXX, which relates to trial of warrant cases initiated on police report. But, the court below must have been aware of the provision