BHUPINDER KUMAR BHATNAGAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bhupinder Kumar Bhatnagar, the petitioner herein, and another by name, Parmod Kumar, were committed by the Metropolitan Magistrate. Delhi to take their trial in the Court of Session and a charge has been framed against the petitioner for an office under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner has filed the present revision petition against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 5.6.1974 framing the charge against the petitioner.

(2.) The order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge framing the charge is being challenged on the ground that the material on record did not make out a prima facie case against the petitioner for an offence under section 376 Indian Penal Code inasmuch as in the statements made by the proscutrix under Ss. 161 & 164 Cr. P.C. she had not implicated the petitioner by name and the description of the petitioner given by her in such statements did not tally with the description of the petitioner and further that in the statement of the prosecutrix before the committing Magistrate, she did not identify the petitioner as the person who had committed rape on her.

(3.) A preliminary objection has, however, been raised by the learned counsel for the State against the maintainability of the present petition under the provisions of the new Criminal Procedure Code. It is pointed out that the order of the learned Additional Session Judge framing the charge against the petitioner is in the nature of an interlocutery order and that under section 377 (2) of the new Code, no revision lies against such an interlocutory order. S. 397 is:-