JUDGMENT Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J. - I n this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 28.11.2022 (Annexure P/1), whereby the District Magistrate while taking cognizance under Section 5(a) of the M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') prosecuted the petitioner and initiated prohibitory proceedings against him. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the State submitted that there is statutory alternative remedy of appeal available to the petitioner under section 9 of the Act, therefore, this petition is not maintainable. 3. In view of aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of the case and instead relegates the petitioner to avail the alternative statutory remedy available to him. 4. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appeal alongwith the application for stay within a period of seven working days from today. 5. In case, such an appeal is filed by the petitioner within the stipulated period, the question of limitation shall not come in his way. The appellate authority is free to decide the appeal in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. 6. Till the application for stay is decided, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner. 7. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. C.C. as per rules