Reference and Revision (397-405)


Author: Ayushi Ranade

The manner of crook justice has some serious penalties on an individual’s life, especially on the proper to existence and non-public liberty. Each and each group constructed through people is susceptible to fallibility, therefore, this applies to the selections rendered by way of courts as well. Resultantly, there must be particular provisions in the area to scrutinize the choices of decrease courts to obviate the scope of a miscarriage of justice. Realizing this aspect, there are sure provisions which have been covered in the crook system on reference and revision in opposition to a judgment or order of courts. As per section 395- 405 0f CRPC there are sure instances in which there is no proper to appeal. The legislators bore this in the idea and integrated the thought of evaluation process referred to as revision in the legislature to absolutely keep away from any miscarriage of justice for even these instances the place the proper of attraction has been barred by using CrPC. Section 397 to Section 405 consists of the powers of revision granted to the greater courts, and the system to work out these powers. It should be mentioned that these powers are massive as properly as discretionary through their very nature.

However, revision relies upon the discretion of a  court, which capability that it is now not a proper as such. In cases, at least one attraction is granted to an accused with the aid of the legislature, whereas there is no such proper in situations of revision. The courts have many instances mentioned the distinction between an appeal and a revision.

 In the case of Hari Shankar vs Rao Ghari Chowdhury[1], the Supreme Court held that “the difference between enchantment and a revision is an actual one. A proper of appeal consists of with it a proper of rehearing on regulation as nicely as fact until the statute conferring the proper of enchantment limits the rehearing in some way as. The strength to hear a revision is usually given to a top-quality Court so that it can also fulfill itself that a precise cause has been determined by law.”

The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 395: Reference to the High Court

1. This area defines reference as in when a case is pending and it includes a query about any of the Act or Ordinance or Regulation or any Provision which is decided for disposal of the case. Then such act or ordinance or provision might also be invalid or inoperative however now not been declared via the Supreme Court or High court docket to which that Court is subordinate and the courtroom shall nation the opinion and motives which is used as a reference for the choice of the High Court.
• The phrase legislation used in this area is described as per the General Clauses Act,1897.

2. If any case which pending does now not follow to sub-section (1) then the Court of Session can refer to the choice of High Court to any query of regulation which is arising.

3. Any Court which is referring to the Subarea (1) or (2) may additionally both commit the accused to a detention center or launch him on bail and show up when they are known as upon.

Section 396: Disposal of the case by the High Court’s decision

1. High Court shall skip order to reason a reproduction of such order to the Court which shall dispose of the case conformable to the stated order.

2. The high courtroom may additionally direct to covers for the celebration that may additionally undergo the costs.

Section 397: Calling for file and workout of the energy of revision

1. The High Court has the energy to name upon for the report of any lawsuits and observe them earlier than any inferior Court inside its neighborhood jurisdiction. It can direct the execution of the sentence or order to droop it and shall launch the accused on bail.

2. The energy of revision referred to in sub-section (1) can’t be used in any interlocutory proceedings.

3. If any utility is made with the aid of a character to the Court beneath this area then no also software can be made through the equal person.

Section 398: Power to order inquiry

The court docket has the electricity to order an inquiry after analyzing any document underneath Section 397. The courtroom may additionally direct the Chief Judicial Magistrate via himself or any of his subordinates to make the also inquiry into any grievance which has been disregarded beneath Section 203 or Subpart (4) of Section 204.

Section 399: Power of revision by way of Session Judge

1. Session Judge might also workout all or any of the energy of the High Court below Sub-section (1) of Section 401.

2. When the energy of revision is exercised through Session choose below sub-area (1) of 401 then the different sub-sections underneath 401 shall additionally follow to proceedings.

3. The choice of Sessions choose in the electricity of revision shall be taken as closing and no similarly intending is entertained.

Section 402: Power of extra Judge An Additional Judge shall additionally exercising the powers of Session Judge in admire of any case transferred to him. Illustration 1: Alamgir v. State of Bihar[2]

The High Court can solely restoration a sentence surpassed via Trial Court. The sentence surpassed is in the discretion of the Trial Court and the High Court can solely beautify the sentence if it relaxed that sentence imposed via the Trial Court is unduly lenient and it has glaringly failed to think about the records which are applicable and they sentence handed through them does no longer meet ends of justice.

Illustration two: Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander & Anr[3] The jurisdiction supplied to the Court beneath Section 397 can be used to have a look at the legality, correctness or proprietary order or judgment exceeded via the trial court docket or any inferior court. This area does no longer mainly uses the phrases “prevent abuse of method of the courtroom and impervious justice” and the jurisdiction below this area is very limited. The jurisdiction can be used in the place there is an error, non-compliance with the provisions of regulation and if the choice is inaccurate in nature or the judicial discretion is exercised arbitrarily.

Illustration three: Asghar Khan And Ors. vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 1 May 1981[4]

When the High Court and Sessions Judge have concurrent powers underneath Section 397 (3) then, in that case, the Session Judge being the Appellate Court, it would now not have exercised the energy of revision. Therefore the High Court solely has the electricity of revision below Section 397 in this case.

Illustration 4: Mohd. Afzal vs Noor Nisha Begum on 5 February 1997[5]

It is obligatory for the Session Judge and it is settled regulation that when the energy of revision is exercised the accused or the stated individual ought to be given a chance to be heard.


The phrase “revision” has no longer been described in CrPC, however, as per Section 397 of CrPC, the High Court or any Sessions Judge have been empowered to name for and take a look at the files of any intending to fulfill oneself:

1. as to the correctness, legality, or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, whether or not recorded or passed, and

2. as to the regularity of any court cases of an inferior court. Moreover, they have the power to direct the execution of any sentence or an order to be suspended. Not simply this, however, to evendirect to launchthe accused on bail or his very own bond if the accused is in confinement. They may additionally even order an inquiry issue to sure limitations. It is genuinely evident that the appellant courts have been granted such powers to obviate any failure of justice.

The Honourable Supreme Court of India, in the context of this provision, held in the case of Amit Kapoor vs Ramesh Chander & Anr[6] that “the revisional jurisdiction can be invoked the place the selections beneath task are grossly erroneous, there is no compliance with the provisions of law, the discovering recorded is based totally on no evidence, fabric proof is not noted or judicial discretion is exercised arbitrarily or perversely.” The identical Court, similarly explaining this provision, held in the case of State Of Rajasthan vs Fatehkaran Mehdi[7] that “the object of this provision is to set proper a patent defect or an error of jurisdiction or regulation or the perversity which has crept in the proceeding.”

The High Court has the electricity to take up a revision petition on its very own action i.e. suo moto or the petition via an aggrieved celebration or any different party. The Allahabad High Court held in the case of Faruk  Gaffar vs the State Of U.P[8]. that “whenever the count number is added to the be aware of the Court and the Court is blissful that in the records and instances of the case, a case is made out for exercising the revisional powers suo moto, it can continually do so in the hobby of justice.”

There are sure statutory barriers that have been imposed on the High Court for exercising its revisional powers as per Section 401 of CrPC, on the other hand, the solely statutory requirement to workout this energy is that the archives of the lawsuits are introduced earlier than it, after which it is entirely the discretion of the Court:

1. An accused is to be given the due possibility to hear him and on order can’t be handed except this is followed.
2. In cases the place an individual has forwarded a revisional utility assuming that an attraction did now not lie in such a case, the High Court has to deal with such software as an enchantment in the pastimes of justice.
3.  A software of revision can’t be proceeded with if it has been filed using a birthday party the place the birthday party should have appealed however did now not go for it.

The High Court, as nicely as the Sessions Court, may also name for the document of any intending of any inferior crook Court located inside its jurisdiction for the motive of gratifying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence, etc. Thus, the Sessions Judge ought to study the query about the inadequacy of sentence given the powers conferred on him via Section 397(1) of CrPC.

The distinction between the powers of the High Court and the Sessions Court is that the Sessions Judge can solely exercise revisional powers which he has known as for by using himself, whereas the High Court has the strength to take up a revisional rely on using itself or when it is added to its knowledge. The powers of a Sessions Court are equal as that of the High Court whilst dealing with revisional cases. The Madras High Court in the case S. Balasubramanian vs The State Of Tamil Nadu[9] held that “a Sessions Judge can entertain a software in revision towards sentence and beautify the sentence in revision in positive cases.” It has additionally been in the past held using the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Alamgir vs the State of Bihar[10] that “in appreciate of enhancement of sentence in revision the enhancement can be made solely if the Court is at ease the sentence imposed via the trial Court is unduly lenient, or that in passing the order of sentence, the trial court docket has failed to reflect on consideration on the applicable facts”


Moreover, there is no doubt that the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court is quite extensive. It can be stated that no structure of any judicial injustice can permeate through this power. It has been held in a number selections that the High Court is allowed to work out its inherent powers when dealing with instances of revision. These inherent powers practice to each important as nicely as procedural matters. However, it can’t think again of any evidence.

[1] 1963 AIR 698

[2] AIR 1959 SC 436

[3] 2012) 9 SCC 460

[4] AIR 1981 SC 1697

[5] 1997 IIAD Delhi 197

[6] (2012) 9 SCC 460

[7] Criminal Appeal No. 216 of 2017

[8] Criminal Misc. Application No. 227273 of 2012

[9] Crl. Revision Nos.8,9 of 2009 and Crl.O.P.No.8025 of 2008

[10] AIR 1959 SC 436