VIJAY BISHNOI,J. - (1.) This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 14.09.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Udaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the revisional court') in Criminal Revision Petition NO.69/2012, whereby the criminal revision petition filed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 has been allowed and the order dated 03.02.2011 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate No.2 (NI Act Cases), Udaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Criminal Case No.3259/2009 has been set aside. Vide order dated 03.02.2011, the trial court while dismissing the complaint for non-prosecution, filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act against the petitioner, has acquitted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act.
(2.) It appears that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 has filed a complaint against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act before the trial court, however, on 03.02.2011, when none was present on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 2, the complaint filed by them against the petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act has been dismissed for non-prosecution and the petitioner has been acquitted form the said offence.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that once the petitioner has been acquitted by the trial court the only remedy available to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 is to prefer an appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. and no criminal revision petition against the order of acquittal was maintainable before the revisional court. It is contended that the revisional court without taking into consideration this aspect of the matter has illegally entertained the criminal revision petition and erred in passing the impugned order dated 14.09.2012.;