Introduction

Reference and revision are legal concepts that aim to ensure justice is delivered. Revision is the process of examining or correcting mistakes made after a final judgment, whereas reference is the process of bringing ongoing cases before higher courts.

The High Court has wide authority, and it has the option to make revisions. The Criminal Process Law’s under section 395 or section 396 define the high court’s reference powers and also Sections 397 through section 405 of CrPC describe the high court’s revisionary powers and the processes for using them.

To ensure accuracy and impartiality, the Civil Process Law contains mechanisms for reference, review, and revision. The Criminal Process Code of 1973, Sections 395 through 405, delineates the adjudicative authorities’ discretionary powers.

Understand Reference in Criminal cases

The term “reference” is used in a case involving two main courts when the lower court requests the High Court for its opinion on a statute, ordinance, or regulation; the Criminal Procedure Code does not specify it. In reference, something is sent or transferred, not a particular legal entity.

Grounds of Reference in Criminal Cases

The lower court must confirm for itself before referring a case to the High Court that:

1. In a case that is currently ongoing, the issue is whether any Act, ordinance, rule, or provision included in any of these documents is lawful.
2. To resolve the case, the answer to such a question must be found.
3. The lower court holds that the Supreme Court or the High Court has rendered a certain Act, ordinance, rule, or provision void or invalid.
4. The lower court will then express its viewpoint, provide justification, and then refer the case to the High Court for its decision.

Purpose of Reference

Reference provisions allow lower courts to get the High Court’s opinion in matters that are not appeal-able and guarantee that the state’s top court will interpret and decide the constitutionality of legislative measures such as Acts, Ordinances, or Regulations before rendering a decision.

Reference in civil procedure code ( CPC )

1. Order 46 ^[1] and Section 113^[2] of the Civil Process Code include the relevant references.
2. Parties may request a referral to the High Court by applying.
3. The purpose, scope, qualifications, authority of the referring court, authority of the High Court, and other details of the referral are all explained.

Reference in Criminal Procedure Code ( CrPC )

1. Chapter XXX of the Criminal Process Code (CrPC) addresses references in Sections 395 and Section 396.
2. Legal techniques for interpreting an Act, Law, or Regulation are called references.
3. In cases involving questions about Acts, Regulations, Ordinances, or Statutes, Section 395 permits referral to the High Court.
4. A reference is characterized as an issue that is pertinent to the settlement of a criminal case, such as the validity of a law, regulation, or act; an Act, regulation, or order of this type may be unlawful or unconstitutional, but this fact is not established by a higher court.

Relevant Provisions of Reference under CrPC

Section 395 of CrPC^[3] – Reference to High Court

According to Section 395 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a court that thinks an Act, Ordinance, Regulation, or Provision is illegal or inoperative but that the High Court or the Supreme Court has not proclaimed it to be so may refer the case to the High Court. The court has to state its judgment and justifications before referring the case to the High Court for a decision. In situations where Subsection (1) is not applicable, any legal issue resulting from the hearing may be submitted to the High Court for resolution by a Court of Session or Metropolitan Magistrate. The accused may be sent to jail by the court or released on bond so long as they appear as requested.

Section 396 ^[4]of CrPC – Disposal of case according to decision of High Court

When referring to a question, the High Court will issue an order, copying the relevant court, which will then carry out the order’s instructions. The person who will pay the reference’s expenses may also be decided by the court.

Case Law

A Sreenivasa Rao and Ors vs. Govt of Andhra Pradesh, on 24 July, 2002 ^[5]

The subordinate court did not have the jurisdiction to rule on the validity of any Act, Ordinance, or Regulation. Therefore, to resolve the legal problem that has to be addressed to resolve the case, that the subordinate court submit the current matter to the Andhra High Court.

Understanding Revision in Criminal Cases

The term “revision” is not defined in the CrPC, but Section 397 permits the High Court or Sessions Judge to examine the records of any proceeding to verify the accuracy, validity, or appropriateness of any decision, order, or punishment. In addition, they have the authority to order an investigation that is subject to restrictions, release the accused on bond or bail, and oversee the implementation of a suspended sentence or order. Appellate courts are empowered to take this action to avoid any injustices.

Purpose of Revision

Revision is the process of evaluating a lower court procedure to make sure it follows a clearly defined primary law and to determine if it is proper and constitutional. The main purpose of it is to fix legal or jurisdictional mistakes.

Revision under CrPC

Legal Revision Procedure

1. A higher court may examine a subordinate court’s ruling or order through a process known as revision.
2. In cases when the lower court may have abused its judicial authority, it seeks to make corrections.
3. Ensuring the lower court follows the law and acts within its jurisdiction is the aim.
4. Revision is an authority that is akin to supervision and superintendence in that it examines the correctness, legitimacy, or appropriateness of actions.
5. According to Section 379, a higher court can request documents from a lower court in order to correct incorrect rulings.
6. Once the decision is made outside of the court’s jurisdiction, the court can only remedy factual or legal errors.

Grounds of Revision in Criminal Cases

• Procedural records must be presented in order to exercise revisional capabilities.
• The accused must be given a fair chance to be heard; otherwise, the order cannot be approved.
• Applications for revisions that presume there is no appeal should be considered appeals.
• Applications for revisions cannot be processed if a party had the option to appeal but declined to do so.

Relevant Provision of Revision under CrPC

Section 397 of CrPC ^[7]– Calling for records to exercise powers of revision

The High Court or Sessions Judge may review the record of any hearing before a subordinate Criminal Court within their jurisdiction to ensure the correctness, legality, or appropriateness of any finding, sentence, or order. In addition, while the record is being reviewed, they have the authority to postpone the enforcement of any judgement or order and free the defendant on bond or bail. For the purposes of this paragraph and section 398, magistrates—executive or judicial—are regarded as subordinate to the Sessions Judge. Any interlocutory order issued in the course of an appeal, investigation, trial, or other procedure is not subject to the revision rights granted by subsection (1). If a person makes an application under this provision to either the High Court or the Sessions Judge, neither will hear another application from the same person.

Section 398 of CrPC^[8] –  Power to order inquiry

The Chief Judicial Magistrate may be instructed by the High Court or Sessions Judge to look into a dismissed complaint under section 203 or subsection (4) of section 204 or to look into the case of a discharged individual who has been accused of a crime.

However, until the party has been given the chance to justify why the order should not be issued, no court may issue one of these kinds. Records covered by section 397 or not are subject to this.

Section 401 of CrPC – The High Court’s Powers of Revision

The Revisional Powers of the High Court under Section 401 of the CrPC ^[9] , The High Court has the authority to execute powers granted on a Court of Appeal or a Court of Session, and where the judges are evenly divided in their opinions, the matter is decided per Section 392. The accused or any other person will not be prejudiced by an order made under this section unless they have been given the chance to present their case, either in person or through the pleader. The High Court cannot change an acquittal decision to a conviction under this clause. The party that may have appealed will not be allowed to participate in a revision hearing if an appeal is allowed but is not filed. The High Court may consider a revision application as a petition of appeal and handle it as such if it is lodged with the false impression that there is no appeal.

Section 402 of CrPC ^[10] –  Powers of High Court to withdraw or transfer revision cases.

The High Court determines which court will conduct revision applications when someone found guilty at the same trial applies to the High Court while someone else applies to a Sessions Judge. The High Court takes over the outstanding applications if it chooses to handle every revision application. The Sessions Judge receives the applications if the High Court chooses not to grant them.

The High Court considers a revision application as though it were a properly filed case when it is transferred to it. The Sessions Judge receives the transfer and treats it as though it were a properly submitted application. No additional revision petitions will be filed by the High Court or any other court at the request of the person whose applications the Sessions Judge has decided upon in the event that the High Court transfers an application to the Sessions Judge.

Case Law

Amit Kapoor Vs. Ramesh Chander & Anr on 13 September , 2012

In the case of Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander & Anr ^[11], the Supreme Court of India decided that it is permissible to exercise its authority under section 397 to examine the validity, accuracy, or appropriateness of a decision or decree made by a subordinate court. This jurisdiction may be used in cases when the judgment is egregiously incorrect, there is no conformity with the law, the conclusion is supported by no evidence, significant evidence is disregarded, or the judge’s discretion is used arbitrarily or perversely.

Alamgir & Another Vs. State of Bihar on 14 November , 1958

In the case of Alamgir v. State of Bihar ^[12], the Supreme Court ruled that an enhancement of sentence in revision could only be granted if the court determined that the trial court’s sentence was excessively lenient or that the trial court had overlooked pertinent facts when determining the appropriate sentence.

Distinguish between reference and revision

Revision Under CPC

Higher courts are only authorized to make revisions under the Civil Procedure Code, as stated by Section 115[6], in cases when the subordinate court neglects to exercise jurisdiction or engages in illegal conduct. Subordinate courts lack the authority to make revisions.

Conclusion

Justice is served through two separate legal processes, revision and reference. Revision is examining or correcting mistakes made after the final verdict, whereas reference entails contacting higher courts on outstanding concerns. Although the High Court lacks the power to reexamine evidence, it does have extensive revisional jurisdiction. By providing processes for reference and amendment, the Code of Civil Process enables courts to operate more effectively and fairly. Nonetheless, a ruling rendered by the same court cannot be altered once it has been issued. To prevent an injustice, the clauses pertaining to review and reference have been included.

References

lawrato.com/indian-kanoon/c ↑

www.indiacode.nic.in/showdata ↑

https://indiankanoon.org/677/ ↑

https://devgan.in/crpc/section/396↑

A Sreenivasa Rao and Ors vs. Govt of Andhra Pradesh, 2002 (4) ALD 881, indiankanoon.org/doc/59/ ↑

www.indiacode.nic.in/show-data

indiankanoon.org/doc/14/ ↑

indiankanoon.org/doc/534676/ ↑

indiankanoon.org/doc/157166/ ↑

indiankanoon.org/doc/17/ ↑

Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander & Anr, (2012) 9 SCC 460, indiankanoon.org/doc/18↑

Alamgir v. State of Bihar, AIR 1959 SC 436, indiankanoon.org/doc/945623/