Skip to main content

Reference & Revision

 

436. Reference to High Court

  1. When a Court has doubts about the validity of a law
    If a court believes that a case involves a question about the validity of a law, ordinance, regulation, or a specific provision, and the court thinks that it is invalid or ineffective, but the High Court or Supreme Court hasn't already declared it invalid, the court must refer the case to the High Court. The court must explain its opinion and reasons when making the reference.
    Explanation: A “Regulation” refers to any regulation defined under the General Clauses Act, 1897.

  2. Court of Session can also refer questions of law
    A Court of Session may, in any case it is handling (that doesn’t fall under section 1), refer any legal question to the High Court for clarification.

  3. What the Court can do while waiting for High Court's decision
    While waiting for the High Court’s decision, the court referring the case can either send the accused to jail or release them on bail.

437. Disposal of Case According to High Court’s Decision

  1. High Court’s role in handling references
    Once the High Court receives the reference, it will make an appropriate order and send a copy of that order back to the court that made the reference. The lower court must then follow the High Court’s decision in handling the case.

  2. High Court’s direction on who pays for the reference
    The High Court can also decide who should pay for the costs of the reference.

438. Calling for Records to Check Decisions

  1. High Court or Sessions Judge can examine lower court records
    The High Court or a Sessions Judge can review the records of any lower criminal court within their jurisdiction to check if the decisions, sentences, or orders made are correct, legal, and properly followed. They can suspend the execution of any sentence or order and, if the accused is in jail, release them on bail while the records are examined.
    Explanation: All magistrates, whether executive or judicial, are considered inferior to the Sessions Judge for this purpose.

  2. Revision cannot be used for interim orders
    The revision powers can’t be used for temporary or ongoing orders in appeals, inquiries, trials, or other processes.

  3. One application only
    If a person has already filed an application for revision with the High Court or Sessions Judge, they cannot file another application with the other court.

439. Power to Order an Inquiry

If the High Court or a Sessions Judge finds it necessary to review any case, they can ask the Chief Judicial Magistrate to conduct further inquiries into any dismissed complaint or a case where a person was discharged.
Note: The person discharged must be given a chance to show why further inquiry shouldn’t happen.

440. Sessions Judge’s Powers of Revision

  1. Powers when a record is called for
    When a Sessions Judge calls for a record of a case, they can use the same powers as the High Court in reviewing the case.

  2. Application of High Court provisions to Sessions Judge
    When a revision is filed with a Sessions Judge, the High Court’s rules for revision (sections 442(2), (3), (4), and (5)) apply, with references to the High Court being understood as the Sessions Judge.

  3. Final decision by Sessions Judge
    Once a revision decision is made by the Sessions Judge, it is final, and no further revision will be allowed by the High Court or any other court.

441. Power of Additional Sessions Judge

An Additional Sessions Judge has the same powers as a Sessions Judge when handling cases assigned to them by the Sessions Judge.

442. High Court’s Powers of Revision

  1. High Court can review any case within its knowledge
    The High Court can, at its discretion, exercise powers similar to those of an appellate court when reviewing cases. If the judges disagree, they will follow the process in Section 433.

  2. Accused must be heard before any negative decision
    No decision can be made against the accused without giving them a chance to be heard, either personally or by their lawyer.

  3. High Court cannot change an acquittal to a conviction
    The High Court cannot convert a decision of acquittal into a conviction during the revision process.

  4. No revision if an appeal could have been made
    If an appeal could have been made but was not, no revision application will be entertained.

  5. Revision treated as an appeal if needed
    If a revision is filed under the wrong belief that no appeal could be made, and if necessary for justice, the High Court may treat the revision as an appeal.

443. High Court’s Power to Withdraw or Transfer Revision Cases

  1. Deciding which court should handle revisions
    If multiple people convicted in the same trial file for revision, the High Court will decide which court should handle the revision cases, considering convenience and the importance of the legal questions. If the High Court decides to handle the cases, it will transfer any revision cases from the Sessions Judge to itself.

  2. Handling transferred revisions
    When a revision case is transferred to the High Court, it will be treated as if it was initially filed there.

  3. Handling revisions transferred to Sessions Judge
    When a revision case is transferred to the Sessions Judge, it will be treated as if it was initially filed there.

  4. No further revisions after transfer
    Once the Sessions Judge disposes of the revision, no further revision can be filed with the High Court or any other court.

444. Option of Court to Hear Parties

Unless otherwise specified, parties do not have an automatic right to be heard before any court when a revision is being considered. However, the court may choose to hear the parties if it deems fit.

445. High Court’s Order to Be Certified to Lower Court

After a revision by the High Court or a Sessions Judge, the decision or order must be sent to the lower court. The lower court must then make any necessary changes to the case according to the revised decision.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Organs of Government: Relationship Between the Executive

  AUTHOR: SHIVANSHU KATARE Introduction to the Organs of Government In a modern democratic state, the government is typically divided into three branches or organs : The Legislature : Responsible for making laws. The Executive : Responsible for implementing laws and managing day-to-day administration. The Judiciary : Interprets laws and ensures justice. Each organ has distinct powers, but they function interdependently. The relationship between the executive and the other organs is crucial for maintaining the proper functioning of the government. Here, the focus is on the relationship between the executive and the legislature , which is often complex and varies across different political systems. 1. The Role and Structure of the Executive The Executive is primarily responsible for the implementation of laws and administration of government policies. It can be divided into two categories: Political Executive : Comprising the Head of State (e.g., the President in India) and the Hea...
Post a Comment
Read more

Judicial Accountability Bill, 2013

  AUTHOR: SHIVANSHU KATARE The Judicial Accountability Bill, 2013 was introduced in the Indian Parliament to address the issue of judicial accountability in the country. The bill aimed to ensure that judges, especially of higher courts, are held accountable for their conduct and decisions, while simultaneously safeguarding the independence of the judiciary. This bill was a step towards bringing transparency, fairness, and accountability in the judicial system, as it is essential for maintaining public trust in the judicial process. Context and Background The bill was introduced in response to several concerns regarding judicial accountability, the lack of transparency in the appointment and conduct of judges, and the increasing demands for judicial reforms. While the Indian judiciary is an independent body, there has been criticism about its lack of accountability mechanisms, particularly in cases involving judicial misconduct or inefficiency. The Judicial Accountability Bill, 2...
Post a Comment
Read more

Theories of law and sociology

 Theories of law and sociology provide different lenses to understand the relationship between law, society, and individuals. Law is often seen not just as a set of rules but as a reflection of societal norms, power structures, and historical context. Sociology of law explores how law functions within a society and how it shapes and is shaped by social relationships, structures, and institutions. Below is a detailed examination of key theories within these two fields: 1. Natural Law Theory Natural Law Theory is one of the oldest and most influential theories about law, originating from ancient Greece and Rome. It suggests that law is not just a human invention but is rooted in a higher, universal moral order. Natural law theorists argue that certain principles of justice and morality are inherent in nature, discoverable through human reason, and should be reflected in human-made laws. Key Figures : Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke. Core Ideas : Laws should be based on moral va...
Post a Comment
Read more