The interpretation of 'interlocutory order' and its applicability to the case, as well as the scope of criminal revision petition and the nature of orders that can be revised.

JUDGMENT

Karamjit Singh , J. - The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of order dated 6.8.2022 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur vide which the said Court accepted the revision petition filed by respondent No.2-Azeez Khan and set aside the order dated 24.11.2021 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur and directed the said Court to commit the case bearing FIR No.220 dated 28.7.2019 under Sections 212/34 IPC Police Station Bhawanigarh to the Court of Session for its trial along with the main case having FIR No.203 dated 14.7.2019 registered under Section 302/34 IPC, Police Station Bhawanigarh.

2. Mr. C.L. Pawar, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1-State, having advance notice of the present petition.

3. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner as well as the State counsel. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order dated 24.11.2021 passed by the Court of Addl. Chief Magistrate, Sangrur was an interlocutory order and as such the revision filed before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur against the said order by Azeez Khan (complainant in FIR No.220 dated 28.7.2019 under Sections 212/34 IPC Police Station Bhawanigarh), was not maintainable as per the provisions of Section 397(2) Cr.P.C. In support of his contentions the counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon Order dated 13.3.2020 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRR No.3728 of 2017 (O&M) titled as Raj Kumar vs. Ravinder and Ors. wherein it was held that as per the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Girish Kumar Suneja vs. CBI 2017(3)RCR(Cri.)665, the Court cannot exercise its revisional jurisdiction against an interlocutory order.

4. The counsel for the petitioner further submitted that FIR No.203 dated 14.7.2019 registered under Section 302/34 IPC, Police Station Bhawanigarh was registered against Aslam Khan and Prince Khan with regard to murder of Jagsir Khan on the basis of the statement of Jagtar Khan brother of said Jagsir Khan. The counsel for the petitioner further submitted that FIR No.220 dated 28.7.2019 under Sections 212/34 IPC Police Station Bhawanigarh is based on totally different cause of action and was registered on the basis of the statement of respondent No.2-Azeez Khan against petitioner Jasvir Singh and one Mandeep Singh under Section 212/34 IPC.

5. The counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the complainant in both the aforesaid criminal cases are two different persons and offence punishable under Section 212 IPC is triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, whereas the offence under Section 302 IPC is triable by the Court of Session. The counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the said two criminal cases are registered against entirely different persons. The counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in the given circumstances the Court of learned Additional Chief Magistrate Sangrur rightly dismissed the application moved by the complainant to commit the case having FIR No.220 dated 28.7.2019 under Sections 212/34 IPC Police Station Bhawanigarh, to the Sessions Court. The counsel for the petitioner while concluding his arguments has contended that the impugned order passed by the revisional Court being illegal is liable to be set aside.

6. On the other hand, the State counsel while supporting the impugned order dated 6.8.2022 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur has submitted that FIR No.220 dated 28.7.2019 under Sections 212/34 IPC Police Station Bhawanigarh was registered against the petitioner and one another person for harbouring the assailants who killed Jagsir Khan and with regard to the said murder FIR No.203 dated 14.7.2019 under Section 302/34 IPC, Police Station Bhawanigarh was separately registered against Aslam Khan and Prince Khan. The State counsel further subm