V.D. Chaturvedi, J. - (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the revisionist, the A.G.A. (representing the State) and the learned Counsel representing opposite parties Nos. 2 to 7.
(2.) The facts are briefly that one Smt. Suraj Kali gave an application on 16/17.5.2000 stating therein that the accused mentioned above had taken her son Sant Ram and committed his murder; that the post-mortem of dead-body was conducted on 18.5.2100; that the police has not taken the statement of the witnesses. She requested that an information be called from police station Gosainganj, regarding the steps taken by the police. The array of the parties shows that Haseeb, Vimla, Shyam Lal Harijan Bhulai, Hridai Ram and Dulli -were made opposite parties as accused. C.J.M., Sultanpur treated the said application under section 156 (3), Cr.P.C. and passed an order on 19.9.2001 for the investigation of the case after registering it. This order dated 19.9.2001 was challenged in Criminal Revision No. 454 of 2001. The Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C:-II), Sultanpur allowed the revision setting aside the impugned order dated 19.9.2001 on the ground that the application under section 156 (1), Cr.P.C. could not be treated as an application under section 156 (3), Cr.P.C. and also on the ground that an investigation was already conducted by the police. The said revision was disposed on 24.9.2002. This revisional order is challenged by Smt. Suraj Kali in this revision.
(3.) Relying upon the pronouncement in Shia Narain Jaiswal and others v. State of U.P. and another, 2007 (57) ACC 7 (SC) ; Madhu Bala v. Suresh Kumar and others, 1997 (35) ACC 371 (SC) ; Rakesh Kumar and others v. State of U.P. and others and Kallu and others v. State of U.P., 2007 (57) ACC 7 (SC) the revisionist's Counsel argued that the accused persons against whom the case was ordered to be registered had no locus standi to assail the order dated 19.9.2001 in Criminal Revision No. 454 of 2001. He further argued that the order for the registration of the case is an interlocutory order hence revision did not lie.;