ORDER :

1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 17.10.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mahasamund dismissing criminal revision preferred by petitioners herein against the order dated 30.6.2022 passed in Criminal Case No.2100/2014 by which learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Mahasamund (for short 'the Magistrate') allowed application filed by respondent under Section 216 read with Section 323 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'CrPC').

2. Facts relevant for disposal of this petition are that on 2.6.2014 complainant Deman Sinha lodged report in Police Station Mahasamund based on which crime bearing No.39/2014 was registered against petitioners herein for commission of offence defined under Sections 323, 306, 382 & 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'). Police submitted final report under Sections 323, 306, 384, 147 of IPC. Based on material available in charge sheet and considering that offence is also registered under Section 306 of IPC, learned Magistrate committed the case under Section 209 of CrPC to the Sessions Court. Learned Sessions Judge taking into consideration facts and circumstances of case and submissions of learned counsel for respective parties, discharged petitioners herein from the offence under Sections 306 & 384 of IPC and sent back the case to the Magistrate for framing of charges under Sections 323 & 147 of IPC. During course of trial, prosecution filed an application under Section 216 read with Section 323 of CrPC for committal of case to the Sessions Court on the ground that there are sufficient material available against accused persons to prosecute them under Section 302 or 304 of IPC. Application was taken up for hearing on 4.3.2022 and the same was rejected by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate stating that Sessions Court vide order dated 10.9.2015 has discharged accused persons from the charges under Sections 306 & 384 of IPC; ordered for framing of charges under Sections 323 & 147 of IPC against them and none of the witnesses is examined on behalf of prosecution. After rejection of application under Section 216 CrPC and after examination of some witnesses before trial Court on behalf of prosecution, fresh application under Section 216 r/w Section 323 CrPC was filed by prosecution for committal of case to the Court of Session. Considering evidence of prosecution witnesses, learned Magistrate vide order dated 30.6.2022 allowed application filed under Section 216 r/w 323 CrPC recording that prima facie evidence appear to be of murder or culpable homicidal death and fixed the case for appearance of accused persons and committal under Section 323 CrPC. Aggrieved by order dated 30.6.2022, petitioners have preferred criminal revision before the Sessions Judge, Mahasamund and the same was dismissed vide order impugned.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners would submit that orders passed by the Courts below are contrary to the provisions of CrPC. Learned Magistrate exercising powers under Section 209 CrPC had committed case to the Court of Sessions observing that one of the offences registered against petitioners is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions. Upon considering material available in record, the Sessions Court discharged petitioners from the charges under Sections 306 & 384 of IPC, remitted back the case to the Magistrate for framing of charges under Sections 323 & 147 of IPC. Once the Magistrate committed the case before the Court of Sessions under Section 209 of CrPC and received back that the offence under Sections 323 & 147 CrPC are triable by the Magistrate, further committal of case by Magistrate is not permissible under law as the same would amount to reviewing own order. As per decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Adalat Prasad vs. Ruplal Jindal, reported in (2004) 6 SCC 371, the Magistrate cannot review his own order. Reliance is also placed on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of Shivjee Singh vs. Nagendra Tiwary & Ors., reported i