DHARAMBIR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging order dated 6.9.2012 (Annexure P -7), whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge has dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner challenging the order of the trial Court, whereby charge was framed against him, being not maintainable. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the revision petition challenging the order, whereby charge was framed against the petitioner, was maintainable. In this regard, learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in Helios Matheson Information Technology Ltd. and others vs. Rajeev Sawhney and another : 2012(1) RCR (Criminal) 354, wherein, it was held as under:

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has further placed reliance on Rajbir Dhiman and others vs. State of Haryana and others, wherein, it was held as under: -

(3.) IN the present case, petitioner is facing trial in FIR No. 83 dated 30.6.2007 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Sadhaura. Charges were framed against the petitioner by the trial Court on 15.12.2011 (Annexure P -5). Aggrieved against the said order, petitioner preferred a revision petition. Vide impugned order dated 6.9.2012 (Annexure P -7), the Court of revision dismissed the revision petition being not maintainable. However, as per the decision of the Apex Court in Helios Matheson Information Technology Ltd's case (supra), revision petition challenging order framing charges against the accused is maintainable.