THOMAS, J.

Four learned Judges of this Court, while sitting single on different occasions, have spoken in different terms on a common subject - whether an order framing charge in a criminal case is an interlocutory order or not. All the four learned Judges have, to bolster up their respective points of view, relied on the Supreme Court decision in V. C. Sukla v. State, AIR 1980 SC 962 : (1980 Cri LJ 690). It was Janki Amma, J. who first said in Jayaprakash v. State, 1981 KLT 100 : (1981 Cri LJ 460) that framing charge is only an interlocutory order and hence no revision under S. 397(2) of the Criminal P.C., 1973 (for short 'the Code') would lie. Learned single Judge quoted from the decision in V. C. Sukla's case in support thereof. But, Chandrasekhara Menon, J. in Abdullakutty Haji v. Additional Judicial Ist Class Magistrate, 1982 KLT 861, dissented from Janki Amma, J. and took the view that a revision is entertainable as the order framing charge is not an interlocutory order. Learned Judge did not find the need to refer the question to a lager bench as the question, according to the learned Judge, was settled by the Supreme Court in V. C. Sukla's case, and observed : "