ORDER : SANDEEP KUMAR, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. 2. This application has been filed on behalf of the No. 332 of 2021 by which the Court below has rejected the petitioners’ application under Section 205 of the Cr.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law(Dewar) of the complainant. Father-in-law and mother-in- law are residing in Mumbai and the Brother-in-law is residing at Motihari. He further submits that it will cause inconvenience to the parties to appear on each and every date in the Court below at Patna city. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sri Rameshwar Yadav vs State of Bihar, 2018 4 SCC 608 Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 is also present. He has submitted that the petitioners ought to have filed a criminal revision application and not the quashing application. 5. He has further submitted that the petitioners may not be given the privilege of benefit under Section 205 of the Cr.P.C, as they will be required regularly to participate in proceedings at Patna city. 6. It is well settled that the quashing application is maintainable against the order by which the application under Section 205 of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected. 7. Considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sri Rameshwar Yadav vs State of Bihar, (Supra), this application is allowed. No. 332 of 2021 is hereby quashed.