ORDER This is an application filed under Art. 134 of the Indian Constitution for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment of my learned predecessor dated 20th January, 1970 in Criminal Reference No. 7/69 on the file of this Court. 2. The first respondent herein had filed complaint in the J.F.C.M.'s Court at Panjim against the petitioners herein for offences under Ss. 409 etc., I.P.C. In that case the petitioners herein filed a petition before the Magistrate contending that the facts mentioned in the complaint did not constitute any offence, that they had filed a civil suit in Bombay High Court for the decision of the civil nature of the dispute mentioned in the complaint and that the complaint was fit to be dismissed or its enquiry was fit to be stayed till the disposal of the civil suit filed in the High Court at Bombay. The learned Magistrate disagreed with the contention of the petitioners herein that the facts stated in the complaint did not constitute any offence, but he agreed with the contention of the petitioners that the enquiry of the complaint was fit to be stayed till the disposal of the suit filed in Bombay High Court by the petitioners. Against the order of the Magistrate, as far as it was concerned with staying the enquiry of the complaint, the first respondent herein filed revision petition in the Sessions Court at Panjim. The learned Sessions Judge, opining that the Magistrate was not right in staying the enquiry of the complaint made a reference to this Court to set aside the order of the Magistrate. My learned predecessor, by his order dated 20th January, 1970, agreed with the opinion of the learned Sessions Judge, set aside the order of the Magistrate staying the enquiry of the complaint and directed the Magistrate to proceed with the complaint and decide it as per law. 3. The petitioners have filed this petition stating that they want to prefer appeal to Supreme Court against the order of this Court dated 20-1-70 and that leave to appeal to Supreme Court may be granted to them. 4. The point for determination is whether the petition can be granted. 5. As per Art. 134 of the Indian Constitution appeal lies to Supreme Court against any judgment, final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court. 4. The point for determination is whether the petition can be granted. 5. As per Art. 134 of the Indian Constitution appeal lies to Supreme Court against any judgment, final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court. If the order dated 20-1-70 passed by my learned predecessor is either a judgment or a final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding then alone this Court can consider whether leave to appeal to Supreme Court can be granted. On behalf of the petitioners it is argued that the order dated 20-1-70 passed by my learned predecessor is a final order and so the petition is maintainable. An order can be said to be final if it is not interlocutory and it does not leave the original proceeding alive and it determines finally the rights of the parties. In this case the impugned order undoubtedly is an interlocutory order. My learned predecessor by the impugned order had only directed the lower Court to proceed with the criminal complaint and decide it according to the provisions of law. The impugned order cannot be said to be a final order or a judgment or a sentence in a criminal proceeding. For this reason this petition is not maintainable and it is dismissed. Petition dismissed.