Honble SHARMA, J.–Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Hare Ram vs. Tika Ram (1) propounded that the scope of the revisional jurisdiction being very limited. the revisional Court can not launch on a detailed and meticulous examination of the case on merits and set aside Magistrates order directing issue of process against the accused persons. (2). A look at the impugned order dated October 23, 1997 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge Deeg demonstrates that while deciding the revision the learned Judge launched on a detailed and meticulous examination of the case on merits and set aside Magistrates order wher by cognizance under sections 498A and 304 B IPC was taken and process was issued against the accused persons. (3). The jurisdiction of revisional Court being limited, it confined only to find out whether there is prima facie case or not. The scope for interference under Section 397 Cr.P.C. with an order taking cognizance when the prosecution is at the initial stage, is very limited and has to be applied rarely with circumspection only when the uncontroverted allegations do not establish the offence. (4). Resultantly, the revision succeeds and is hereby allowed, the impugned order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge Deeg stands set aside and the case is remitted back to the learned Additional Sessions Judge Deeg for deciding revision petition afresh with a view to find out whether from the material on record prima facie case exists against the accused persons or not. The record of the case be sent back forthwith. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Additional Sessions Judge Deeg on April 30, 1998. It is further directed that during the pendency of the revision petition order dated May 26, 1997 of the learned Magis- trate shall remain stayed.