Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

In the present revision case, a preliminary objection was taken by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police that the revision case is not maintainable under Section 397 of Cr.P.C., against the order passed by the Court below under Section 451 of Cr.P.C., refusal of return of properties. According http://www.judis.nic.in to the learned Government Advocate, the order being passed under Section 451 of Cr.P.C., is only an interlocutory in nature and such order is not open to challenge in the revision case, in view of the bar of Section 397(2) of Cr.P.C., which, is extracted hereunder.

According to the learned Government Advocate, the learned Judge has categorically held that the revision would not lie against the order passed by the trial Court under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. He would also further submit that the statutory provisions are very clear that the orders are passed either way under Section 451 of Cr.P.C., only pending finalisation of the trial and therefore there is a clear bar as provided under Section 397(2) of Cr.P.C.

http://www.judis.nic.in 4 At this, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that all along this Court has been entertaining the revision cases against the orders passed by the lower Court under Section 451 of Cr.P.C and several orders have been passed by various Judges of this Court entertaining the revision cases against the order passed under Section 451 of Cr.P.C.

http://www.judis.nic.in 8 This Court has considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsels both on the side of the petitioner as well as on the side of the respondent. Although, the learned Judge of this Court has held that the revision is not maintainable against the order passed under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. overwhelmingly this Court entertained revision cases against the orders passed under Section 451 of Cr.P.C.