The term Interlocutory order was explained in view of the Apex Court verdict
in Amarnath vs State of Haryana, the term Interlocutory order in section
397(2) has been used in restricted sense and not in any broad is artistic sense
and the Interlocutory orders under section 397 are those orders which do not
decide or touch the important rights or liabilities of the parties and any order
which substantially affects the rights of the parties or decide certain rights
of the parties.
Can not be said to be an Interlocutory order si as to bar a Revision application
to the High Court and the order regarding Interim custody of a few valuable
article like truck decides and touches very important rights of the parties. Aby
party', who was denied even interim possession, would be substantially and
adversely effected by it and would be entitled to invoke Revisional Jurisdiction
of the High Court, because by such order the court was affecting and
adjudicating important rights of the parties on the particular aspect and such
order can not be said to be an Interlocutory order as contemplated by section
397(2) if the Code of Criminal Procedure.
If a practical view of what is contained in Section 451 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure is taken in the prevailing situation of arrears of cases then also it
can be said that order of interim Custody was purely Interlocutory order. Cases
are pending for more than a decade and if during enquiry or trial, order for
interim Custody was passed against a person who is lawfully entitled to claim
possession of such case properly, his rights can be vitally affected by orders
passed against him.
Hence, in that view of the matter ,it cannot be said that such order is
Interlocutory order or Interim order which appears during pendency of the
inquiry, investigation or trial . Section 451 of the Criminal Procedure Code
also empowers the court to pass such orders as was otherwise expedient to do so
, including sake of such property or order for otherwise disposal of the
If a court passes order for sale of property or otherwise directs disposal of
such Property then, after such order ,the Property has to be followed in the
hands of the purchaser and consequently also it can not be said to be an order
which was not revisable.