Hon'ble Harsh Kumar, J.

1. Heard Sri Vijay Prakash learned counsel for the revisionists, Sri Ashutosh Yadav learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

2. This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 30.06.2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge Anti Corruption (C.B.I.) Ghaziabad in Criminal Appeal No. 30 of 2009, arising out of Criminal Case No. 2223-A of 2006, Case Crime No. 4 of 1998, under Section 498A I.P.C. and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Vijai Nagar, District Ghaziabad by which the judgment and order of conviction of appellants dated 06.03.2009 passed by Magistrate, was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the Magistrate for disposal in the light of the observations made in the body of the judgment and in accordance with law.

3. Feeling aggrieved, the accused have preferred this revision.

4. The learned counsel for the revisionists contended that the revisionists are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the victim and have been falsely implicated in Case Crime No. 04 of 1998 under Sections 498-A, 323/34, 354, 506, I.P.C. & Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act; that the learned Ma