REFERENCE AND REVISION IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS: AN ANALYSIS

Author : Mahika Yadav

INTRODUCTION

“There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of the law and in the name of justice.”

-Charles-Louis de Secondat

Background of the Study : The redress authority for victims of violence grants supreme court supervisory control. Chapter 30 – The Guide and Correction Section 30 – Section 395 to Section 405 of the Legal Proceeding Code, 1973 Justice is reasonably and accurately dealt down in court proceedings without errors or misconduct. The Criminal Procedure Code analysis and updating is a study of procedures. You have the power to carry out or postpone a term. The revision power does not grant the litigant a privilege, it merely maintains the High Court’s authority to do so in compliance with the law. You may also request an inquiry that is subject to such restrictions.

• The rectitude of the lower court
• regularity of trials in the courts
• correction authority cannot be included in interlocutory decisions

• The case of the individual requesting reform, even if too short, will be addressed during the trial.

“Reference”- A compilation with specific pieces with knowledge from the trial is the guide in lay terms. Reference is merely a appeal by the Court of Justice to a higher court to justify an Act, law and rule in this case.

Therefore, a detailed review of the laws must be done to decide if the details of the situations, along with their interpretation, have been overlooked, misapplied or reassessed. In fact, Paragraph 395-396 of the Law of Criminal Prosecution is protected by Chapter XXX.

Section 395 describes a connection as where the matter is before the trial court and includes an problem that is relevant for the resolution of a criminal prosecution, referring to the legitimacy of a Law, Order or Act or of the requirements of a Law, an Ordinance and any Act. Such an Act, rule or order could be inoperative or unconstitutional, but it has not been ruled by a higher court such as the Supreme Court or the High Court.

As such, for its cause or belief, the lower court or judge may refer the higher court. The Court’s judgment can be focused on such an view or explanation. The convict can in such a case be put in jail or held in bail before the retribution. Section 396 of the Code of Criminal Procedure protects a group who must pay the expenses borne in appealing to the tribunal the justification or advice demanded on the point of law. It also stipulates whether the pending litigation is decided by the trial court prior to the return of the judgment or reason.

“Revision”- The revision is basic words that have already been made to amend or modify a judgment. The flow is equal. This is, a court’s ruling may be checked by the State, the Court or the Court of Justice or the Court of Justice. Every party has the primary purpose of evaluating, modifying, updating, revising the judgment already made by the Court of Justice.

The right of the higher court to reconsider a judgment is voluntary and thus does not grant or enforce an injunction on a higher court to re-examine any judgment it makes. The Supreme Court found that the reform rights were not given to the litigants with respect to Pranab Kumar v. WB.

The Code shall serve as a regulation as well as ensuring that the High Court has the power to insure that justice complies with rules and laws. The amendment guarantees that the Court does not surpass or misuse its rights under the Code.

Section 362 of the code of criminal procedure, for instance, stipulates, after signing, that no court shall re-examine or modify its final judgment, final judgment or final decision. A clerical, mathematical or grammatical error is the only case.

Consequently, the supremecourt can have power to appeal, however the lower court has right to trial. The right to amend or modify is not available while an appeal before a higher court is pending.

“Revision is covered under Chapter XXX, sections 397 – 402 of the Code. The Sections provides as follows”:

“Section 397” – The Court has the right to order that its Court or other lower court be reported.

“Section 398” – The judge has authority to request an inquiry into a ruling of a court after reviewing the record of the proceedings.

“Sections 399 – 400” – The judge of the meeting has the right to reconsider a judgment and will ask for the review of the judgment by the extra judges of the meeting.

“Section 401” – The High Court will examine the proceedings before or in the federal or federal courts.

“Section 402” – The High Court also has the right to pass or remove the cases of investigation before it.

1.1.3 Difference between Reference and Revision

SR. NO.	REFERENCE	REVISION
1.	The code of criminal procedure applies to Chapter XXX.	The code of criminal procedure applies to Chapter XXX.
c	The Manual for Criminal Law refers to Portion XXX.	It is under chapter XXX of the criminal procedure code.
3.	The higher court’s focus focuses on law questions.	The lower courts as well as the high court are liable for examining the proceedings that have already been adjudicated.
4.	References are rendered whilst the case is pending before the trial.	Revision continues on the grounds of the Court’s final decision or final order.
5.	The appeal to the higher court throughout the trials, is presented.	Either the trial court The investigation can begin with a motorcycle or the higher court.
6.	Application of in solar or null statutes, statutes, regulations or policies involving the situation at hand is the superior court.	Revision shall check, check, alter or change by trial or superior trial a spelling, clerical or arithmetical mistake.

1. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. Extension of scope and examination terminology under the law of criminal prosecutions.
   1. To evaluate the relation and the modification in keeping with the code of criminal law.
   1. Difference between the two, especially under the code.

• METHODOLOGY

 The data needed for the paper were gathered by text books, documents, policy papers and government websites.

• JUDGEMENT

1. Alamgir v. State of Bihar

Also a decision passed down by the Court may be reinstated by the High Court. The granted punishment can only raise the penalty if it is considered to be unduly lenient and has clearly neglected to take care of the relevant evidence, and the judgment imposed by the High Court is not in line with the goals of the Trial.

t imposed by the High Court is not in line with the goals of the Trial.

1. Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander & Anr

Competence given to the Tribunal under Section 397 can be extended to the review by the trial court or other inferitorial court of the validity, correctness or patent order or decision. The words “prevent exploitation of jury and protect justice,” and authority under this provision is quite restricted in specific, are not included in this clause. The integrity should be extended where mistakes occur, infringements of the law are made, and the ruling is misunderstood in intent or the judicial power is improperly exercised.

• Asghar Khan And Ors. vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 1 May, 1981

Unless, according to Section 397(3), the High Court and Sessions Judge had concomitant rights otherwise the Sessional Judge becomes the Court of Appeal, the Judge should not have exerted revisional authority. Consequently, in this situation the High Court is only qualified to amend Article 397.

• Mohd. Afzal vs Noor Nisha Begum on 5 February, 1997

It is important for the court judge that the victim or the complainant will be granted the chance for trial while the review is practiced.

1. CONCLUSION

Links and updates grant the perpetrators of crime jurisdiction. It is essential for equal justice and every citizen has a right to life and personal rights, pursuant to Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. For this to be real, trail without errors and insufficiencies should be held. Such authorities give claimants a fair right to be considered, and following an application for investigation their complaint will be put to them. High will even take motorcycle action on revision forces. The right of appeal protects individuals who have been wronged by statute or who are perpetrators of fraudulent judgments.

The High Court’s temporary authority is very broad, and this control can not be broken into in any way through judicial inequality. In all cases of review, the High Court has been allowed to use these intrinsic powers and several cases have shown this. Substantivity and processes shall be subject to certain natural forces. A comparison and analysis are separate legal concepts, but are both for the same reason, namely preserving fairness. The main tribunal shall be briefed on questions of law pertaining to an pending issue. Revision, on the other side, is an review or modification of mistakes after the transmission of the final verdict.