https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300023 An application under Section 482 CrPC to quash process issued under Section 406 IPC was considered inappropriate where a revision before the Sessions Court provided an efficacious statutory remedy. The material noted that an order issuing process is not purely interlocutory, because success in challenging it would terminate the criminal proceedings, and therefore revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 is available. It also distinguished the Magistrate's power to recall process from the separate question of revisional maintainability. On this analysis, inherent powers were not to be invoked when a specific and effective remedy existed, and the applicants were directed to pursue revision before the Sessions Court. en-us Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Jan 2022 12:04:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300023 An application under Section 482 CrPC to quash process issued under Section 406 IPC was considered inappropriate where a revision before the Sessions Court provided an efficacious statutory remedy. The material noted that an order issuing process is not purely interlocutory, because success in challenging it would terminate the criminal proceedings, and therefore revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 is available. It also distinguished the Magistrate's power to recall process from the separate question of revisional maintainability. On this analysis, inherent powers were not to be invoked when a specific and effective remedy existed, and the applicants were directed to pursue revision before the Sessions Court. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300023