This writ petition is directed against order, dated 12-11-1985 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad whereby he dismissed revision petition filed by the petitioner in limine on the ground that the same was incompetent as the petitioner could obtain relief by invoking the provisions of section 249-A, Cr.P.C. Before the trial Court.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has refused to exercise jurisdiction duly vested in him under section 435/439, Cr.P.C. The provisions of section 249-A, Cr.P.C. Create no bar in exercise of revisional jurisdiction available to the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
3. The learned Assistant Advocate-General, on the other hand, submitted that in fact the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is not properly worded. He, however, conceded that the provisions of section 249-A, Cr.P.C. Are distinct and create no bar to exercise revisional jurisdiction under section 435/439, Cr.P.C.
4. I have considered the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties and find that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad has erred to hold that the revision petition against the order of the Magistrate was not competent. The learned Additional Sessions Judge is competent to revise order of the learned Magistrate in exercise of jurisdiction duly vested in him.
The provisions of section the 249-A Cr.P.C, create no impediment in his way to hear and decide rev petition on merits. In this view of the matter the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is set aside and declared to be of no legal effect.
5. This petition is allowed with a direction to the learned Additional Sessions Judge to decide the revision petition on merits.