Rajesh Tandon, J. - (1.)HEARD Sri Arvind Vashisth, counsel for the applicants, A.G.A. for the respondent no. 1 and Sri Vipul Sharma, counsel for the respondent no. 2 to 8. By the present criminal application, the applicants have sought following relief:
It is, therefore, Most Respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this application and order dated 15.12.2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, Government order dated 30 -10 -03 in Case No. 18 of 2003 State Vs. Omvesh and others (Annexure 3) be set aside.

It is further prayed that the operation and effect of the order dated 15.12.2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Haridwar in case No. 18 of 2003 State Vs. Omvesh and others (Annexure 3) be stayed during the pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble court.

(2.)BRIEFLY stated, applicant no. 1 lodged a FIR at Police Station Kankhal District Haridwar in connection with the offence committed on 09.11.2001 in the premises of Gurukul Kangri Vishwavidyalaya Haridwar wherein opposite parties no. 2 to 8 formed an unlawful assembly and tried to disrupt the proceedings of the meeting and mounted assault upon the employees of the Gurukul Kangri Vishwavidyalaya, which were present in the meeting. The report was registered as Case Crime No. 127 of 2001 under sections 147, 148, 323, 307 I.P.C. Matter was investigated and charge -sheet was submitted under Section 147, 148, 149, 323, 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Magistrate took cognizance upon the charge -sheet but before committal could have taken place, the Assistant Prosecuting Officer moved application under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure accompanied by a Government Order dated 30.10.2003 whereby the Government chose to withdraw prosecution against the accused persons on the ground that the accused persons are respectable persons and one of them is minister and another is wife of Central Minister. The said application was allowed vide order dated 15.12.2003.

(3.)COUNSEL for the applicants has submitted that the decision of withdrawal of prosecution against the opposite parties no. 2 to 8 was taken without considering that it was in the public interest.
;