SUDESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . This petition under Sections 482/483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") is directed against the order dated 18th February, 2002 passed by Sh. D.C. Anand, Addl. Sessions Judge, Shahdara, Delhi dismissing revision petition, as not, maintainable against the order dated 7th August, 2001 framing charges under Sections 147/149/186/353/332/342/506 Indian Penal Code in case FIR No. 247/98 P.S.Vivek Vihar by ACMM.

(2.) . Notice. Mr.Pawan Sharma accepts, notice on behalf of State. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the point Involved in the revision petition is very short and the same can be heard and disposed of at this stage itself.

(3.) . Prosecution allegations, in brief, are that on 29th August, 1998 at about 4.30 p.m. al Anaj Mandi Chowk, Shahdara, petitioners along with others formed an un-lawful assembly with the common object of obstructing the SDM, Vilvek Vihar and other Government officials from discharging their public duties and used criminal force against them. They wrongfully confined the SDM and threatened the said public servants with dire consequences. The case was registered and petitioners wore arrested. After completion od investigation, challan was filed. On the basis of material available on record, Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on 7th August, 2001 held that prima facie case under the above noted Sections is made out against the petitioners. Charge was framed against them. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioners filed a revision petition which came up for hearing before Addl. Sessions Judge, who by impugned judgment and order dated 18th February, 2002 held that order framing charge is an interlocutory order and revision against such an order Is not maintainable under Section 397(2) Code of Criminal Procedure and dismissed the same, while so holding reliance was placed on the observations made by the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla vs. State, AIR 1980 SC 962 and a decision of Single Bench of Kerala High Court in sarojini Amma Vs. Sarojini, 1988 crl. L.J. 1362. This order is under challenge.