If a motion court granted limited inspection for the purpose of determining the sufficiency of the indictment, would this be an abuse of power?

Similarly, it is no answer to argue that if the motion court had granted limited inspection for the purpose of determining the sufficiency of the indictment, there would have been at most an abuse of discretion. The motion court has power to do for some purposes what it lacks power to do for others. Moreover, althought prohibition has not been applied in this precise situation, it has been suggested that it might be available upon a showing of abuse of discretion in granting the nonappealable order of inspection (Matter of Schneider v. Aulisi, 307 N.Y. 376, 383, 121 N.E.2d 375; but, see People ex rel. Cohn v. County Ct. of Schenectady County, 11 A,.d.2d 438, 441, 207 N.Y.S.2d 840).