The order directing for framing of charges is an interlocutory order, and the revision petition is not maintainable against such an order.

1. Learned Judicial Magistrate (Judge Small Causes) has ordered for framing of charge vide order dated 10th August, 2009 against the petitioner in case FIR No. 09/2000 under Sections 420, 468, 471 RPC.

2. Petitioner has filed this revision petition seeking cancellation/setting aside of FIR No. 09/2000 of Police Station, Crime Branch, Srinagar, Kashmir as also order for taking cognizance and of framing of charge. Record has been summoned, which has been received.

3. Nobody appeared for petitioner.

4. Mr. Thakur, learned counsel for respondents submitted that this petition is not maintainable as order of framing of charges is interlocutory order and in view of the bar contained under Sub Section 4(a) of Section 435 Cr. P. C. revision petition is not competent. Learned counsel, accordingly, submitted that petition be dismissed.

5. Petitioner has sought cancellation of copy of FIR arid same has not been placed on record of the petition. Petitioner has also sought setting aside of the order of taking cognizance.

6. When an information is received by Police Station about the commission of cognizable offences, it is the duty of the concerned authority to register the case in terms of section 154 of Code of Criminal Procedure. When investigating officer has reason to suspect the commission of offence, then in terms of Section 156/157 of Code of Criminal Procedure, he is duty bound to investigate the case.

7. In this case after conducting the investigation report under Section 173 Cr. P. C. has been filed before the Court of competent jurisdiction. Learned trial Magistrate after considering the material placed on record and after hearing the parties has ordered for framing of the charges which is called in question in this revision petition.

8. The first information report in the fact situation of this case has lost its significance as information received by the Police-Station was investigated and ultimately report under Section 173 Cr. P. C. is filed before the court of competent jurisdiction. The FIR in these circumstances cannot be quashed. Even the revision petition is not competent for seeking cancellation/setting aside of the FIR. FIR can neither be cancelled nor set aside. In this case the learned trial magistrate has ordered for framing of charges being prima facie satisfied that the material available before him does warrant that the accused shall be put on trial, would not thus call for interference with act of taking cognizance of offences, which is otherwise, a mental act.

9. The Full Bench of this Court in case titled Manohar Nath Sher v. State of J&K reported in 1980 KLJ page 1 has defined as to what is the interlocutory order.

10. The Division Bench of this Honble Court in case titled S.K. Mahajan v. Municipality, Jammu and ors., reported in 1982 KLJ page 1 has specifically dealt with question as to whether framing of charge is an interlocutory order so as to attract the bar created by Sub-Section 4(a) of Section 435 of Code of Criminal Procedure. The Division Bench of this Court has held that the order directing for framing of charges is interlocutory order and the revision petition is not maintainable against such an order.

11. For the above stated reasons, this petition being misconceived is, accordingly, dismissed.

Registry to send back record of the trial court immediately.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document