Example of interlocutory order

The Bombay High Court's ruling in Avinash v. State of Maharashtra, a Single Judge of the Chattisgarh High Court in Amarnath Agarwal v. Jai Singh Agarwal had  the occasion to hold that an order passed by the concerned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of the Code does envisage any findings against the accused nor does it include any sentence passed against the accused, thereby making it an interlocutory order in the flesh and hence alien to the remedy of a criminal revision.             

 A Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court,when seized of the said issue in the decision reported as 2011 (2) ALJ 217 :Father Thomas v. State of U.P. had said that a prospective accused had no locus standi to challenge a direction for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C by filing a revision petition before cognizance or issuance of process against him. The Allahabad High Court decided that a revision petition against such an order directing registration of FIR under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C was not maintainable. The Full bench noted that the accused had a right to raise his defence only during the course of trial and even on filing of complaint, when the Magistrate proceeds to take cognizance, the prospective accused cannot intervene or raise his defence unless summons are issued. Thus, a direction to register an FIR, in the view of the Allahabad High Court was not inherently revisable, being interlocutory in nature.