S.N.H.ZAIDI, J. - (1.) THIS revision has been directed against the judgment and order dated 14.9.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Mau in Criminal Revision No. 155/2006 whereby order dated 18.7.2006 of the trial Court was set aside.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to this revision, in brief, are that a criminal case No. 1302 of 1995, State v. Satya Narayan Singh under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, IPC was pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau in which an application under Section 311, Cr.P.C. was moved on behalf of the prosecution for calling the handwriting expert to proof the handwriting and signatures of the accused of certain documents. That application was rejected by the trial Magistrate by order dated 18.7.2006 against which a Criminal Revision No. 155/2006, Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank v. State and another, was moved on behalf of the bank. The said revision was allowed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Mau by the impugned order dated 14.9.2006 and the Magistrate was directed to call for the witness for examination after ensuring that the copies of the documents which are to be proved are given to the accused. The said order has been challenged before this Court in this revision. I have heard the learned counsel for the revisionists and the learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.
(3.) IT appears that the revision against the order of the Magistrate dated 18.7.2006 was directed on behalf of the bank whereby the Magistrate had rejected the application moved on behalf of the prosecution for summoning the witness. The said order dated 18.7.2006 of the learned CJM was an interlocutory order in view of the definition of the term 'interlocutory order' and accordingly as defined by the Supreme Court in Poonam Chandra Jain and another v. Fazru, 2005 Cr.L.J. 100, according to which an oder which does not terminate the proceedings or finally set aside the rights of the parties is an interlocutory order. In other words, in ordinary sense of the term, an interlocutory is one which only set aside a particular aspect or particular issue or a particular matter in a proceedings, suit or trial but which does not conclude the trial at all. Against that order before the Sessions Judge was barred by Sections 397(2), Cr.P.C.;