( 1 ) HEARD Mr. C. H. Vora, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, Mr. Utkarsh Jani for Mr. B. G. Jani, learned counsel representing respondent No. 1, and Mr. L. R. Pujari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No. 2.

( 2 ) THE complaint dated 24th January, 1995, filed against the applicants by respondent No. 1, the application dated 24th January, 1995, praying for seizure of certain documents, and two orders dated 24th January, 1995, passed thereon are sought to be challenged by the applicants herein in this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, hereinafter called "the Code".

( 3 ) SO far the two orders dated 24th January, 1995, are concerned, the learned counsel appearing for the applicants has not been able to dispute that they are revisable and, therefore, the applicants have effective statutory alternative remedy provided by the Code itself. It is well settled that inherent powers of the High Court are to be used sparingly, and only when there is no other provision in the Code for redressal of the grievance of the aggrieved person. The applicants shall be at liberty to invoke the revisional powers o