- (1.) The present criminal revision petition under Section 397 r/w. Section 401 Cr. P. C. is preferred by the accused-petitioners against the order dated 3-2-2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge Hindaun City in Criminal Revision No. 94/ 2001. whereby the trial Court was directed to take cognizance against the accused-pe titioners in Criminal Case No. 574/200 arising out of F. R. No. 234/2000, P. S Hindaun City for the offences under Sec tions 498-A and 201, I. P. C.
(2.) Learned counsel appearing for th accused-petitioners submits that th Revisional Court vide its order dated 3-2 2003 has directed the trial Court to registe a case under Sections 498-A and 201. I.P.C against the accused-petitioners and shall proceed in accordance with the provisions of law.
(3.) The main challenge of the petitioners to this direction is that the Revisional Court cannot pass such direction without giving opportunity of being heard to the accused and can only direct to enquire into the matter and remit the case and after holding further enquiry shall proceed further and if a case is made out, then a case can be registered under Sections 498-A and 201, I. P. C. To this effect, the learned counsel for the petitioners referred Section 398, I. P. C., more particularly proviso to Section 398, Cr. P. C. which provides that no Court shall make any direction under this section for inquiry into the case of any person who has been discharged unless such person has had an opportunity of showing cause why such direction should not be made.;