Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Section 442
High Court's powers of revision
(1) In the case of any proceeding the record of which has been called for by itself or which otherwise comes to its knowledge, the High Court may, in its discretion, exercise any of the powers conferred on a Court of Appeal by sections 427, 430, 431 and 432 or on a Court of Session by section 344, and, when the Judges composing the Court of revision are equally divided in opinion, the case shall be disposed of in the manner provided by section 433.
(2) No order under this section shall be made to the prejudice of the accused or other person unless he has had an opportunity of being heard either personally or by advocate in his own defence.
(3) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorise a High Court to convert a finding of acquittal into one of conviction.
(4) Where under this Sanhita an appeal lies and no appeal is brought, no proceeding by way of revision shall be entertained at the instance of the party who could have appealed.
(5) Where under this Sanhita an appeal lies but an application for revision has been made to the High Court by any person and the High Court is satisfied that such application was made under the erroneous belief that no appeal lies thereto and that it is necessary in the interests of justice so to do, the High Court may treat the application for revision as a petition of appeal and deal with the same accordingly.
Why this exists
This is the core provision defining the High Court's broad supervisory revisional powers over subordinate criminal courts, allowing it to correct errors even without a formal appeal. The safeguards, no conviction from an acquittal, mandatory hearing, and no revision where an appeal was available but unused, prevent this wide power from being misused to bypass the more structured appeal process or to unfairly harm someone who hasn't had a chance to respond. It corresponds to section 401 of the earlier CrPC.
How courts read it
Courts, including the Supreme Court, have consistently held that the bar on converting an acquittal into a conviction through revision is absolute; if the High Court finds an acquittal wrong, it can at most order a retrial or further inquiry, but it cannot itself record a conviction in revisional jurisdiction, since that would effectively bypass the more rigorous procedure required for appeals against acquittal.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: The High Court can use its revisional powers to convict someone who was acquitted by a lower court.
Fact: The law explicitly forbids the High Court from converting a finding of acquittal into one of conviction while exercising revisional jurisdiction. - Myth: A person who never bothered to appeal a decision can still freely use revision instead.
Fact: If an appeal was available but was not filed, no revision petition at that person's instance will normally be entertained, though a genuinely mistaken revision petition can sometimes be treated as an appeal.