R.N.Prasad, J.

1. A single Bench referred the. case to the Division Bench and as such the case has been placed before us. Before the Single Bench on the basis of a decision in the case of Smt. Bachcha Devi alias Bachcha Bei Devi V/s. State of Bihar and Ors., 2000 (1) PLJR 930, counsel for the petitioner argued that the order taking cognizance and issuance of process is an interlocutory order and as such it is not revisable, On the other hand, counsel for the opposite party on the basis of decision in the case of Chandra Kumar Singh V/s. State of Bihar and Anr., 2002 (3) PLJR 206 argued that such an order is not interlocutory one and as such revision is maintainable. In view of the conflicting decisions the learned Single Bench of this Court referred the matter to the Division Bench for decision whether taking cognizance and issuance of process after enquiry u/s. 202, Cr PC is an interlocutory order or not.

2. The short facts, relevant for the purpose, are that a complaint was filed, enquiry u/s. 202, Cr PC was held, cognizance was taken against the accused persons for the offence u/s. 420/34, I PC, processes were issued, the accused persons preferred revision against the or