Short Note : 1. The non-applicant instituted a complaint in the Court of Magistrate First Class, Sakti on 26-3-1974. The learned trial Magistrate held that he had no jurisdiction to try the case and dismissed the complaint and discharged the applicant. The learned Sessions Judge remanded the case to the Magistrate for holding further enquiry. The applicant preferred a revision. Non-applicant contended that impugned order being an interlocutory order no revision lies. Held: The contention of the accused is sound. The revision must fail on that count. Section 397 (2) of the new Code bars a revision against an interlocutory order. 2. The applicant's counsel however, argued that the complaint having been instituted before the new Code came into force, the revision would be under the provisions of the old Code. This Court does not agree. The complaint was at the stage of enquiry till 06-2-1976. The trial began after the complaint was ordered to be registered and process issued to the accused. In so far as the applicant was concerned, proceedings against him commenced from 6-2-1976. His trial would be governed by the new Code in the matter of procedure, as also in the mailer of appeal and revision. Revision dismissed.