Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The instant misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioners challenging the order dated 3.7.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Udaipur in Criminal Revision No. 51/2008 whereby he has affirmed the order dated 23.4.2008 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhariyawad, District Udaipur in Criminal Case No. 129/2008 taking cognizance against the petitioners for the offence under Section 500 I.P.C.
(3.) Succinctly stated the facts necessary for the disposal of the instant misc. petition are that the respondent No. 2 complainant filed a complaint against the petitioners in the Court of A.C.J.M., Dhariyawad with the allegations that the petitioners were the members of the community to which the complainant also belongs. The petitioners issued a mandate to ex-communicate the complainant from the society as a result whereof the complainant was defamed and was being looked down by the other members of the community. On the presentation of the complaint, the proceedings under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. were initiated and the learned Magistrate vide order dated 23.4.2008 proceeded to take cognizance against the petitioners for the offence under Section 500 I.P.C. The petitioners preferred revision which too has been dismissed. Hence, the petitioners have preferred the instant misc. petition aggrieved of the orders impugned.;