Criminal Misc. No. 30382 -M of 2006 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. 30382 -M of 2006 Date of decision February 14, 2008 Banarsi Dass .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Namit Sharma, Advocafor the petitioner RAJESH BINDAL, J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order May 30, 2005 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal whereby in revision filed by respondent no. 2 against the order dated November 25, 2003 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class., Karnal summoning him to stand trial in a complaint filed by the petitioner under Sections 218, 468, 471 and 506 IPC was set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal has gone totally beyond its jurisdiction in appreciating the entire controversy on merits at this stage, which it could not. However, he could not respond to a query of the Court to the effect that how the petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “ the Code”) for quashing of the order was maintainable when the petitioner had a specific remedy of revision before this Court against the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge. The remedy of revision before the learned Court below was availed of by respondent no.2 and against that order, petitioner could certainly file a revision before this Court. In response to this, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court has wide powers to even convert the present petition for quashing the order under Section 482 of the Code into a revision once that is found to be not maintainable. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case where the present Criminal Misc. No. 30382 -M of 2006 -2- **** petition was filed on March 30, 2006 against the impugned order dated May 30, 2005, nearly 10 months after the impugned order was passed, when the limitation to file the revision had already expired long back, I do not find it to be a fit case where the extraordinary powers of this Court to treat this petition to be a revision needs to be exercised. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. February 14, 2008 (Rajesh Bindal) Pka Judge