Final order test in criminal revision: interlocutory rulings on preliminary objections are not appealable under section 205(1).

For an appeal under section 205(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935, an order is appealable only if it finally disposes of the proceeding or conclusively determines the rights in dispute. A criminal order that merely overrules preliminary objections and permits the prosecution to continue is interlocutory, even if it decides an important issue, because the trial remains alive for ordinary determination. On that basis, the High Court's order was neither a judgment nor a final order, and the appeal was not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order of the High Court in criminal revision was a judgment, decree or final order within the meaning of section 205(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935 so as to sustain the appeal.

Analysis: The governing test of finality is whether the order finally disposes of the rights or points in dispute and brings the matter to an end. An order that merely decides a preliminary or interlocutory question in the course of a criminal trial, even if it determines an important issue, is not a final order if the proceedings remain alive for trial in the ordinary way. In criminal matters, the word judgment refers to the final determination of the case by conviction or acquittal, and cannot ordinarily include an interlocutory ruling. The order under challenge only overruled the preliminary objections and allowed the prosecution to proceed.

Conclusion: The order was neither a judgment nor a final order within section 205(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935, and the appeal was not maintainable.

Ratio Decidendi: For purposes of appeal under section 205(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935, only an order that finally determines the proceeding or conclusively disposes of the rights in dispute is appealable; an interlocutory criminal order on a preliminary objection is not.

---