JUDGEMENT

1. The first party in a proceeding u/s. 145 Cr. P.C., has preferred this revision against the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in Criminal Revision No. 23(3) (S) of 1974-75 remanding the case to the trial court for a fresh determination of the question of possession involved in this proceeding after taking into consideration the affidavits sworn and the written statements filed in the Court of the S.D.O., Sambalpur and in the court of Shri A.R. Sabat, another First Class Magistrate at Sambalpur. In view of the limited question involved in this revision, it is not necessary for me to state here the respective cases put forward by the contesting parties on the question of possession of the disputed property.

2. Mr. Basu, the learned counsel for the opposite parties, at the outset opposed the maintainability of this revision on the ground that the impugned order being an interlocutory order in the proceeding, S.397 (2), Cr. P.C., 1973, bars a revision against such an order. According to Mr. Basu, the proceeding u/s. 145 Cr. P.C., is still alive, and so the impugned order passed in the said proceeding is merely an interlocutory order, and so no r