Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or No Date COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures ` CRLR No. 638 of 2024 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.

Heard Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned counsel for the revisionist and Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned Brief Holder for the State.

2. This criminal revision is preferred against the interlocutory order dated 21.08.2024 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun/Special Judge, Vigilance, District Dehradun in SST No. 02 of 2020, whereby, his application moved under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order under challenge.

4. Section 397(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) states that the power of revision conferred by sub-section (1) shall not be exercised in relation to any interlocutory order passed in any appeal, inquiry, trial or other proceedings.

5. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Girish Kumar Suneja Vs. CBI reported in (2017) 14 SCC 809 has held as follows:-

“24. The second reason why Amar Nath is important is that it invokes the principle, in the context of criminal law, that what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. Therefore, when Section 397(2) of the Cr.P.C. prohibits interference in respect of interlocutory orders, Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be availed of to achieve the same objective. In other words, since Section 397(2) of the Cr.P.C. prohibits interference