( 1 ) THE petitioners by this petition titled under Art. 226 of the constitution, are praying for quashing and setting aside the orders dated 27th December, 1999, Annexure a" and dated 13th October, 2000 Annexure g of the Metropolitan magistrate, Court No. 15, Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No. 3996/99 arising out of inquiry Case No. 209/93 as also the order dated 20th October, 2000 (Annexure h) of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Ahmedabad in Criminal Revision application No. 514/99. In the alternative, the petitioners prayed to convert the non-bailable warrant into bailable warrant issued against the petitioners by the learned metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 15, Ahmedabad under the order dated 27th december, 1999, Annexure a in the interest of justice. Second prayer has been made for calling of the record and proceeding of Criminal Case as well as criminal revision application. As usual, prayer has been made for grant of interim relief.

( 2 ) THIS Court on 24th October, 2000, issued notice to the respondent and interim relief in terms of para 14 (e), incorrectly mentioned as 14 (E) has been granted.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the respondent correctly contended that this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable. In this special criminal application, challenge has been made to the judicial orders passed by the Courts subordinate to this Court and this petition is maintainable only under Art. 227 of the Constitution.

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has failed to satisfy this Court how this petition, which is titled under Art. 226 of the Constitution, is maintainable gains the orders passed by the Courts below. Be that as it may. Merely by mentioning wrong provision, this petition cannot be dismissed because the petition is maintainable under Art. 227 of the constitution and accordingly it is treated to be under Art. 227 of the Constitution.

( 5 ) BRIEFLY stating the facts of the case ar. e that the petitioner No. 1 is serving as assistant Inspector in I. T. I, and the petitioner No. 2 is the mother of petitioner No. 1, who is also in service as Clerk in the District Education Office. The petitioner No. 1 was married to one Rekhaben, daughter of Bhagwatiprasad on or around 24th January, 1993 and on 19th August, 1993 she was, as per the case of the petitioners, done to death by some unknown person in the absence of the petitioners. The petitioner No. 2 filed a complaint before the Ellisbridge Police Station, Ahmedabad on the same day i. e. on 19. 8. 1993. On or around 17. 11. 1993, the grandfather of deceased Rekhaben had lodged a complaint before Ellisbridge Police Station, Ahmedabad against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Sec. 498-A of IPC which was registered as I-C. R. No. 647/93 and the same is pending. The grandfather of the deceased Rekhaben had filed complaint under Sec. 200 of Crpc, 1973 before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 15, ahmedabad against the petitioners and one another accused being R. D. Rana. On this complaint, the Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 15, Ahmedabad ordered for investigation under Sec. 156 (3) of Crpc, 1973. It is the case of the petitioners that after making investigation in the said complaint, which was registered as M. Case No. 87/93, the Investigating Officer under Sec. 173 (2) read with Sec. 173 (5) of Crpc, 1973, has filed a summary report which was accepted by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. It appears though very specifically not mentioned that a summary report submitted by police was not accepted by the Metropolitan Magistrate concerned and the complaint of the complainant was ordered to be inquired under Sec. 202, Crpc. After examining the complainant and other witnesses, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 15, ahmedabad was pleased to issue non-bailable warrants against the petitioners on 27. 12. 1999. The petitioners preferred criminal revision application No. 28/2000 before this