AIR 1978 SUPREME COURT 47 ::1978 Cri App R (SC) 1 ::1977 U J (SC) 733 ::1978 AllCriR 78 ::1978 SCC(Cri) 10 ::1977 4 SCC 551 ::1978 AllCriC 183 (2) ::1978 All WC 96 ::1978 Mah LJ 1 ::1978 MPLJ 24 ::1978 (1) SCR 749 ::1978 SC Cri R 23

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Bombay)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): P. K. Goswami, N. L. Untwalia, D. A. Desai , JJJ

(A) Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.482, S.397(2)— Bar under S. 397 (2) - High Court if can exercise its inherent power of quash an interlocutory order. The following principles may be stated in relation to the exercise of the inherent power of the High Court :- (1) That the power is not to be resorted to if there is a specific provision in the Code for the redress of the grievance of the aggrieved party. (2) That it should be exercised very sparingly to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice; (3) That it should not be exercised as against the express bar of law engrafted in any other provision of the Code.(Para 8) The purpose of putting a bar on the power of revision in relation to any interlocutory order passed in an appeal, inquiry, trial or other proceeding is to bring about expeditious disposal of the cases finally. More often than not, the revisional power of the High Court was resorted to in relation to interlocutory orders delaying the final disposal of the proceedings. The Legislature in its wisdom decided to check this delay by introducing sub-section (2) in S. 397. On the one hand, a bar has been put in the way of the High Court (as also of the Sessions Judge) for exercise of the revisional power in relation to any interlocutory orde....