The main legal point established in the judgment is that the proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. should not be set aside merely because the petitioner approached the Civil Court for seeking declaration of Will null and void.

JUDGMENT :

RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Petitioner has filed this criminal revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by order dated 07.03.2017, passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Burhanpur in Criminal Revision No. 47/2016 arising out of order dated 08.08.2016 in Case No. 20/2015 passed by SDM, Burhanpur. The learned Revisinoal Court has stayed the proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. pending before SDM Burhanpur. Vide order dated 08.08.2016, SDM has rejected the application filed by respondent/applicant for staying the proceedings of 145 of Cr.P.C.

2. According to case, respondent has preferred an application before SDM Burhanpur contending that on 08.07.2016 respondent has received summons issued from 4th Civil Judge Class II, Burhanpur, which shows that petitioner has preferred civil suit before the Civil Court for the same subject-matter. Therefore, in view of the settled law, criminal proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. cannot be proceeded further. It is well settled principle of law that due to pendency of civil suit for same subject-matter, parallel proceedings of under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. cannot be proceeded analogously. She prays for staying the further proceedings of 145 of Cr.P.C.

3. In reply of the application filed by the respondent, it is contended that he has filed the suit for declaring the Will null an void, which is not relevant to subject-matter of this case. In the proceedings of 145 of Cr.P.C. only dispute of possession has to be determined, therefore, proceedings of Section 145 of Cr.P.C. can not be stayed.

4. Vide order dated 08.08.2016, after considering the contention of both the parties, the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate has decided the application and given the findings that due to absence of any stay order, proceedings of 145 of Cr.P.C. can not be stayed and he has fixed the case for further proceedings. Being aggrieved, respondent has challenged the same before 1st ASJ Burhanpur by filing revision petition bearing No. 47/16. In revision the learned Judge came to this conclusion that in civil suit, petitioner is seeking relief against the respondent for declaring Will null and void, declaration of his partition and also to permanent injunction, therefore, in view of the settled principle, proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. pending before the SDM Burhanpur, can not be proceeded continuously, till the decision of civil suit. Accordingly, the learned ASJ Burhanpur has granted stay in favour of respondent.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned ASJ Burhanpur erred in passing the impugned order as the effect of Section 145 of Cr.P.C. has nothing to do with the pending civil suit. The Magistrate has empowered under the said provision to resolve the dispute regarding immovable property. The learned Revisional Court ignored this fact that the revisional power can not be exercised in relation to any interlocutory order. In this case, the order rejected by the SDM is interlocutory in nature and same can not be challenged in revision proceeding. Apart from that the civil suit filed by the petitioner is not for declaration of title and possession but for declaration that the purported Will is void and not binding on the petitioner. With the aforesaid submission he prays for allowing this petition.

6. Heard the submission of counsel for the petitioner and perused the case.

7. The first issue raised before this Court by the petitioner's counsel regarding maintainability of this petition. From perusal of order dated 08.08.2016, passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Burhanpur, it appears that the same is looking as intermediate or quashi-final order. There are some order which are neither interlocutory nor final in nature. They are termed as intermediate order or quashi-final order. If the order passed by the SDM, is reversed by the revisional Court then the further proceedings shall be proceeded according to civil suit and there will b