(1.) The contour of the facts and material, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record is that, initially complainant-Raman Gumber, Proprietor of M/s Fashion Forecast Knitwear-respondent(for brevity "the complainant") has filed the complaint against the petitioners-accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881(hereinafter to be referred as "the Act"). The matter was compromised between the parties and the petitioners-accused had handed over three cheques in lieu thereof to the complainant with the specific undertaking that the cheques will be encashed on presentation. Consequently, the complaint was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to the complainant to revive the complaint, in case, the impugned cheques were dishonoured vide order dated 03.05.2012 by the trial Court. As, the impugned cheques issued by the petitioners-accused were again dishonoured, therefore, in the wake of application filed by the complainant, the complaint was revived to its original number by the trial Court, by means of impugned order dated 21.03.2013(Annexure P-6).
(2.) Thereafter, the petitioners-accused moved two applications, one for directing the complainant to withdraw the complaint and the second for permission to produce the defence evidence. Both the applications were dismissed by the trial Court by virtue of impugned order dated 21.03.2013(Annexure P-5).
(3.) Aggrieved thereby, the revision petition filed by the petitioners-accused, was disposed of by the Revisional Court through the medium of impugned order dated 05.04.2013(Annexure P-7), which in substance is as under:-