ORDER : This petition has been filed against the order 05.06.2015, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, in Cr. Revision Petition No.24/2014, titled as Pushap Raj vs. Anil Kumar & others, whereby Revision Petition preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed on the ground that it was not maintainable in view of provisions of Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘Cr.P.C.’) by observing that against order/judgment of acquittal, Revision Petition is not maintainable but appeal shall lie. 2. Petitioner herein had filed a private complaint before the trial Magistrate, wherein trial Magistrate after recording preliminary evidence as provided under Section 200 of cr.P.C. and thereafter, considering statement of the complainant and the witnesses, had dismissed the complaint under Section 203 of Cr.P.C. without issuing notice to the respondent/accused. 3. No cognizance of the commission of offence was ever taken by the trial Magistrate against the respondent as the complaint was dismissed at the stage of Section 203 Cr.P.C. Whereas, commencement of the proceedings before Magistrate against the respondent shall have to be after issuance of process under Section 204 Cr.P.C., on taking cognizance of commission of offence. As trial Magistrate, instead of taking cognizance and issuing process against respondents, has dismissed the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C., therefore, there is no acquittal of the respondent/accused in the complaint filed by the petitioner. 4. In view of above, learned Sessions Judge, Mandi has committed not only material irregularity, but major illegality in dismissing the Revision Petition preferred by the petitioner against dismissal of the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. 5. Accordingly, impugned order dated 05.06.2015, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., in Cr. Revision No.24 of 2014, titled as Pushap Raj vs. Anil Kumar & others, is set aside and case is remanded back to learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, to decide the same afresh, by reviving the Revision Petition, on its own merit, in accordance with law. 6. Parties are directed to appear before learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, on 15.12.2021. It is made clear that no fresh notice shall be issued to the parties for their appearance before learned Sessions Judge, Mandi. 7. Copy of this order is directed to be transmitted to learned Sessions Judge, Mandi. 8. Pending application(s), if any also stand disposed of. 9. 6. Parties are directed to appear before learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, on 15.12.2021. It is made clear that no fresh notice shall be issued to the parties for their appearance before learned Sessions Judge, Mandi. 7. Copy of this order is directed to be transmitted to learned Sessions Judge, Mandi. 8. Pending application(s), if any also stand disposed of. 9. Petitioner is permitted to produce a copy of this order, downloaded from the web-page of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, before the authorities concerned, and the said authorities shall not insist for production of a certified copy but if required, may verify it from Website of the High Court.