AIR 2017 SUPREME COURT 3620 ::AIR 2017 SC (Criminal) 1387

Supreme Court Of India

(From : 2016 (6) Adr 767)

Hon'ble Judge(s): Madan B. Lokur, Kurian Joseph, A. K. Sikri , JJJ

(A) Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.397(2), S.482— Revision - Right to file - Interlocutory orders not revisable due to prohibition contained in S. 397(2) - Cannot be circumvented by resort to S. 482. Constitution of India , Art.136— There are three categories of orders that a court can pass - final, intermediate and interlocutory. There is no doubt that in respect of a final order, a court can exercise its revisional jurisdiction - that is in respect of a final order of acquittal or conviction. There is equally no doubt that in respect of an interlocutory order, court cannot exercise its revisional jurisdiction. As far as an intermediate order is concerned, court can exercise its revision jurisdiction since it is not an interlocutory order.(Para 17) Therefore, when S. 397(2) prohibits interference in respect of interlocutory orders, S.482, cannot be availed of to achieve same objective. In other words, since S. 397(2) prohibits interference with interlocutory orders, it would not be permissible to resort to S. 482. To set aside an interlocutory order prohibition in S. 397 will govern S. 482 thereof. In present case, although, appellants might have an entitlement (not a right) to file a revision petition in High Court but that entitlement can be taken away and in any event, High Court is under no obligation to en....