Can Criminal Revisions Be Filed Against Interlocutory Orders Before the High Court?

Introduction

In criminal proceedings in India, orders passed by subordinate courts may be challenged before the High Court under its revisional jurisdiction. One of the most frequent doubts litigants and practitioners have is: Can criminal revisions be filed against interlocutory orders before the High Court?

The direct answer is: No, criminal revisions generally cannot be filed against interlocutory orders before the High Court due to the express bar under Section 397(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), except in rare cases where the order is not purely interlocutory or where inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC or constitutional powers under Article 227 are invoked.

To fully understand this, we must break down the concepts of criminal revision, interlocutory orders, statutory provisions, case law, and the exceptions carved out by courts over time.

What Is a Criminal Revision?

A criminal revision is a statutory remedy provided under Sections 397 to 401 CrPC. It allows the High Court (and Sessions Court) to examine the legality, correctness, and propriety of any finding, sentence, or order passed by a subordinate criminal court. The revisional jurisdiction exists to ensure that subordinate courts act within their jurisdiction and follow the law.

Key Features of Criminal Revision:

It is not an appeal; the High Court does not rehear the case.
It corrects jurisdictional errors, legal errors, or material irregularities.
It can be filed by an accused, a complainant, or even the State in some situations.

Statutory Provisions: Sections 397–401 CrPC

Section 397 CrPC – Calling for Records

Sub-section (1) empowers the High Court or Sessions Judge to call for and examine the record of any proceeding to satisfy themselves about the correctness, legality, or propriety of any finding, sentence, or order.
Sub-section (2) contains a crucial bar:

“The powers of revision conferred by sub-section (1) shall not be exercised in relation to any interlocutory order passed in any appeal, inquiry, trial or other proceeding.”

Thus, Section 397(2) CrPC expressly prohibits criminal revision against interlocutory orders.

Section 398 CrPC – Power to Order Inquiry

This section enables the High Court to direct further inquiry in cases where a complaint has been dismissed or accused discharged.

Section 401 CrPC – High Court’s Powers of Revision

The High Court can exercise any power of an appellate court while hearing revision, but subject to Section 397(2)’s limitations.

Understanding Interlocutory Orders

Meaning of Interlocutory Order

“Interlocutory” means something temporary, interim, or not deciding the substantial rights of the parties finally. These orders are passed during the pendency of proceedings to aid the progress of the case.

Examples of interlocutory orders in criminal cases:

Granting or refusal of adjournments.
Summoning of witnesses.
Permission to amend complaint or file additional documents.
Grant or rejection of police remand.
Orders framing or refusing to frame charges (sometimes treated as intermediate orders).

Why the Bar on Interlocutory Orders Exists

The legislature intended to prevent unnecessary delays in criminal trials. If every interim order could be challenged in revision, proceedings would become unending. Hence, the 1973 CrPC introduced Section 397(2) to restrict such challenges.

Judicial Interpretation of “Interlocutory Order”

The term “interlocutory order” is not defined in the CrPC. Over decades, the Supreme Court and High Courts have interpreted its meaning.

Key Cases

Amar Nath v. State of Haryana (1977) 4 SCC 137
- The Supreme Court held that “interlocutory order” has to be given a reasonable meaning.
- Purely interim or temporary orders that do not decide rights are interlocutory.
- Orders substantially affecting rights or deciding certain aspects cannot be treated as interlocutory.
Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra (1977) 4 SCC 551
- Laid down the “trichotomy” of orders:
  - Interlocutory Orders (barred from revision).
  - Final Orders (revision lies).
  - Intermediate Orders (not final but substantially affect rights — revision may lie).
- The Court held Section 397(2) does not bar revision against orders which are not purely interlocutory but are intermediate.
V.C. Shukla v. State (1980) Supp SCC 92
- Distinguished between interlocutory and intermediate orders.

Principle Evolved:
Only purely interlocutory orders (procedural or temporary orders) are barred from revision. Orders which are “intermediate” or substantially affect rights may still be revisable.

Examples of Orders Held to Be Interlocutory (Revision Barred)

Orders granting adjournments.
Orders summoning additional documents.
Orders postponing examination of witnesses.
Orders under Section 91 CrPC for production of documents.
Orders granting or refusing remand.

Examples of Orders Held Not to Be Interlocutory (Revision Maintainable)

Orders framing charges (depending on facts).
Orders rejecting discharge applications.
Orders dismissing a complaint under Section 203 CrPC.
Orders directing issuance of process under Section 204 CrPC.
Orders cancelling bail.

Role of Section 482 CrPC (Inherent Powers)

Although Section 397(2) bars revisions against interlocutory orders, the High Court retains its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC. These powers are to be used sparingly to prevent abuse of process or to secure the ends of justice.

Key Points about Section 482:

It cannot be used as a substitute for appeal or revision.
It can be invoked where there is gross abuse of process or manifest injustice.
Often used to quash criminal proceedings or FIRs.

Case Law:
Madhu Limaye held that even though Section 397(2) bars revision, Section 482 can be used to correct glaring injustices.

Article 227 of the Constitution

Apart from statutory powers, High Courts also have supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227. This power is constitutional and cannot be curtailed by Section 397(2). However, it is exercised only in exceptional cases.

Practical Remedies Against Interlocutory Orders

Wait for Final Order: Challenge the order in an appeal or revision after final disposal.
Use Section 482 CrPC: File a petition under Section 482 if there is a glaring miscarriage of justice.
Writ Petition under Article 226/227: In rare cases involving fundamental rights or lack of jurisdiction.

Procedure for Filing Criminal Revision

If the order is not interlocutory or qualifies as intermediate, the following steps apply:

Certified Copy: Obtain certified copy of the impugned order.
Drafting the Petition: Clearly mention facts, legal grounds, and the nature of the order.
Annex Documents: Include lower court records, affidavits, and supporting material.
Limitation: File within 90 days from the date of order (Article 131 Limitation Act).
Seek Stay: File an application to stay the impugned order pending revision.

Why the Distinction Matters

Efficiency of Trial: Prevents accused or complainant from derailing proceedings.
Judicial Economy: High Courts are not burdened with constant challenges.
Fairness: Still allows remedy where orders substantially affect rights.

Case Law Illustrating the Principles

Rajendra Kumar Sitaram Pande v. Uttam (1999) 3 SCC 134: Held that discharge orders are intermediate, hence revision maintainable.
K.K. Patel v. State of Gujarat (2000) 6 SCC 195: Clarified intermediate orders can be revised.
Adalat Prasad v. Rooplal Jindal (2004) 7 SCC 338: Summoning orders under Section 204 CrPC revisable.
Prabhu Chawla v. State of Rajasthan (2016) 16 SCC 30: Held that even if Section 397(2) bars revision, inherent powers under Section 482 remain unaffected.

FAQs on Criminal Revision Against Interlocutory Orders

Q1. Can every interlocutory order be challenged in revision?
No. Section 397(2) CrPC expressly bars revision against purely interlocutory orders.

Q2. What if the order affects my substantial rights?
If the order is “intermediate” or substantially affects rights (e.g., framing of charges), revision may be maintainable.

Q3. Can I use Section 482 CrPC instead of revision?
Yes, but only to prevent abuse of process or secure justice — not to bypass the bar routinely.

Q4. Is there a time limit for filing criminal revision?
Generally 90 days from the date of order as per the Limitation Act.

Q5. Does filing revision automatically stay the criminal proceedings?
No. A separate stay application must be filed; otherwise proceedings continue.

Key Takeaways

Criminal revisions cannot be filed against purely interlocutory orders before the High Court due to the bar under Section 397(2) CrPC.
However, intermediate orders that substantially affect rights are revisable.
Section 482 CrPC and Article 227 of the Constitution remain available in exceptional cases to correct gross injustices.
Litigants must carefully identify whether an order is interlocutory, intermediate, or final before invoking revisional jurisdiction.

Conclusion

The revisional jurisdiction of the High Court under Sections 397–401 CrPC is a vital safeguard against jurisdictional errors and illegality by subordinate courts. Yet, to ensure speedy trials, the legislature has imposed a bar on revisions against purely interlocutory orders.

Thus, criminal revisions generally cannot be filed against interlocutory orders before the High Court, except in cases where the order is not purely interlocutory or where extraordinary inherent or constitutional powers are invoked. This balanced approach preserves both judicial efficiency and the rights of the accused or complainant, ensuring justice is done without obstructing the trial process.

Important: Kindly Refer New Corresponding Sections of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, (BNS); Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, (BNSS); & Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, (BSA) for IPC; CrPC & IEA used in the article.

Disclaimer: This information is intended for general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult with a qualified lawyer for personalized advice specific to your situation.

Advocate J.S. Rohilla (Civil & Criminal Lawyer in Indore)

Contact: 88271 22304