POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF HIGH COURT IN INDIA:

The Constitution of India has not made any clear and detailed description of the powers and
functions of the High Court as it has done in the case of the Supreme Court. The
Constitutions says that the Jurisdiction of the High Court shall be the same as immediately
before the commencement of the Constitution, subject to the provisions of the constitution
and the laws made by the appropriate legislature. The powers and functions of the High Court
can be divided as follows:

Original Jurisdiction:

All matters relating to revenues are included in the original jurisdiction of the High court.

Besides, civil and criminal cases are also supposed to belong to the original jurisdiction. But
only the High Courts at Kolkata, Mumbai and Chennai can have the first trial in civil and
criminal cases. The original criminal jurisdiction of the High Court has, however, been
abolished by the Criminal Procedure code, 1973. At present the criminal cases are tried in the
city sessions Courts in Kolkata, Mumbai and Chennai.

Appellate Jurisdiction:

The High Court is the highest court of appeal in the state. It has appellate jurisdiction in civil
and criminal cases.

a. In civil cases, appeal can be made to the High Court against the decisions of the District
Judges and the Subordinate Judges.

b. Again, when any court subordinate to the High Court decides an appeal from the decision
of an inferior court, a second appeal can be made to the High Court only on question of law
and procedure.

c. Besides, appeal from the decision of a single Judge of the High Court itself also lies to the
High Court. In criminal cases appeals against the decisions of :

A Sessions Judge or an Additional Sessions Judge, where the sentence is of imprisonment

exceeding 7 years; or

Assistant Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Magistrate or other Judicial Magistrates in certain

specified cases other than ‘petty’ cases can be made to the High Court.
Powers of issuing Directions, Order,Writs:

The High Court has been empowered to issue writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, and
prohibition certiorari and quo warranto for the enforcement of the fundamental rights and ‘for
other purposes’. The Supreme Court can issue the writs only for the enforcement of
fundamental rights and not for other purposes. The power of the High Court to issue writs in
the nature of habeas corpus cannot be curtailed even during emergency.

309. Power to postpone or adjourn proceedings.

(1) In every inquiry or trial, the proceedings shall be continued from day to day until all the
witnesses in attendance have been examine, unless the Court finds the adjournment of the
same beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded:
Provided that when the inquiry or trial relates to an offence under Sec.376, Sec.376-A,
Sec.376B, Sec.376C or Sec.376D of the Indian Penal Code, the inquiry or trial shall, as far as
possible be completed within a period of two months from the date of filing of the
chargesheet.
(2) If the Court, after taking cognizance of an offence, or commencement of trial, finds it
necessary or advisable to postpone the commencement of, or adjourn, any inquiry or trial, it
may, from time to time,for reasons to be recorded, postpone or adjourn the same on such
terms as it thinks fit, for such time as it considers reasonable, and may by a warrant remand
the accused if in custody:
Provided that no Magistrate shall remand an accused person to custody under this section for
a term exceeding fifteen days at a time:
Provided further that when witnesses are in attendance, no adjournment or postponement
shall begranted, without examining them, except for special reasons to be recorded in writing:
Provided also that no adjournment shall be granted for the purpose only of enabling the
accused person
to show cause against the sentence proposed to be imposed on him.]
Provided also that -
(a) no adjournment shall be granted at the request of a party, except where the
circumstances are beyong the control of that party;
(b) the fact that the pleader of a party is engaged in another court, shall not be a ground
for adjournment;
(c) where a witness is present in Court but a party or his pleader is not present or the
party or his pleader though present in Court, is not ready to examine or cross-examine
 the witness, the Court may,if things fit, record the statement of the witness and pass
such orders as it thinks fit dispensing with the examination-in-chief or cross-
examination of the witness, as the case may be.
Explanation 1.- If sufficient evidence has been obtained to raise a suspicion that the accused
may have committed an offence, and it appears likely that further evidence may be obtained
by a remand, this is a reasonable cause for a remand.
Explanation 2.- The terms on which an adjournment or postponement may be granted
include, in appropriate cases, the payment of costs by the prosecution or the accused.

Judging the validity of laws:

In the original Constitution the High Courts were given powers of judging the validity of the
Central and the State laws. But the 42nd Amendment of the Constitution took away the
powers of the High Courts to determine the validity of the central laws and put various
conditions on their powers of judging the validity of the State laws. However, the 43rd
Constitutional (Amendment) Act, 1978 has restored these powers to the High Courts.

Powers of superintendence:

Every High Court has a general power of superintendence over all the lower courts and
tribunals within its jurisdiction except military courts and tribunals. By virtue of this power
the High Court can call for returns from such courts; make and issue general rules and
prescribe forms for regulating the practice and proceedings of such courts; and prescribe
forms in which books, entries and accounts shall be kept by the officers of any such court.

Powers of taking up cases:

If a case is pending before a sub-ordinate court and the High Court is satisfied that it involves
a substantial question of the constitutional law, it can take up the case and decide it itself.

Control over sub-ordinate courts:

The High Court can control the subordinate courts in the State. It is to be consulted by the
Governor in the matter of appointing, posting and promoting district judges. The High Court
plays an important role in the appointment, promotion, etc. of the staff of the subordinate
courts including the District Court.
WRITS:

Habeas Corpus is a Latin term, which literally means “You should have the body”. The writ
is issued to a produce a person before a Court who has been detained or imprisoned and not
produced before the magistrate within 24 hours whether in prison or private custody and
would release the person if such detention is found illegal. The purpose of the writ is not to
punish the wrong doer but merely to release the person unlawfully detained.
However, Article 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty) cannot be suspended even during
the proclamation of Emergency. Therefore, Habeas Corpus becomes a very valuable writ for
safeguarding the personal liberty of an individual. While the Supreme Court can issue the
writ of habeas corpus only against the State in case of violation of Fundamental Rights    
whereas the high court can issue it also against private individuals illegally or arbitrarily
detaining any other person.

Writ of habeas corpus can be filed by any person on behalf of the person detained or by the
detained person himself. In Sunil Batra ll vs Delhi admn. , a letter written by a convict to one
of the judges of the Supreme Court was treated as a writ petition. The court employed this
writ for the neglect of State penal facilities. The writ was also issued when a ban was
imposed on the law students to conduct interviews with prison mates to provide them legal
relief.

Mandamus is a Latin word, which means “to command”. It is a judicial remedy in the form
of an order to act legally and to abstain from perpetrating an unlawful act. Where A has a
legal right which cast certain legal obligation on B, A can seek a writ of mandamus directing
B to perform its legal duty. This writ of command is issued by the Supreme Court or High
Court when any Government, court, corporation or tribunal or public authority has to perform
a public or statutory duty but fails to do so.
The Supreme Court may issue a mandamus to enforce the fundamental right of a person
when its violation by some governmental order or act is alleged. The High courts may issue
this writ to direct an officer to exercise his constitutional and legal powers, to compel any
person to discharge duties cast on him by the constitution or the statue, to compel a judicial
authority to exercise its jurisdiction and to order the government not to enforce any
unconstitutional law.
In Unni Krishnan vs Union of India, held that a private medical/ engineering college comes
within the writ jurisdiction of the court irrespective of the question of aid and affiliation.

In Jatinder Kumar vs State of Punjab, held that Article 320(3) of the constitution which
provided that before a government servant was dismissed, the UPSC should be consulted, did
not confer any right on a public servant and hence failure to consult the public service
commission did not entitle the public servant to get mandamus for compelling the
government to consult the commission. However, if the authority is under law obliged to
exercise a dissection, Mandamus would lie to exercise it in one way or the other.

Certiorari is a Latin word meaning ‘to inform’. ‘Certiorari’ may be defined as a judicial
order operating in persona and carried out in the original legal proceedings, be issued against
constitutional bodies, statutory bodies like corporation, non statutory bodies like companies
and cooperative societies and private bodies and person requiring the records of any action to
be certified by the court and dealt with according to the law.
There are various grounds on the basis of which the writ of certiorari is issued:

(1) Lack of jurisdiction

(2) Excess of jurisdiction.
(3) Abuse of jurisdiction.
(4) Violation of the principles of natural justice.
(5) Error of law apparent on the face of the record
In Syed yakoob vs Radhakrishnan, held that the jurisdiction of the high court to issue a writ
of certiorari is a supervisory jurisdiction and the court exercise it is not entitled to act as an
appellate court. An error of law which is apparent on the face of the record can be corrected
by a writ, but not an error of fact. However, if a finding of fact is based on ‘no evidence’ that
would be regarded as an error of law which can be corrected by certiorari.

Prohibition refers “to forbid or to stop” and is popularly known as “Stay order”. The writ is
issued by the Supreme Court or any High Court when a lower court or a quasi-judicial body
tries to violate the powers vested in it, prohibiting the latter from continuing the proceedings
in a particular case.
In India, prohibition is issued to protect the individual from arbitrary administrative actions.
Prohibition does not lie against an authority discharging executive functions but against an
authority discharging judicial functions.
Quo warranto is a Latin term, which means ‘’ by what warrant’. The writ is issued to
restrain a person from holding a public office to which he is not entitled. It can be issued
against offices created by the constitution such as the Advocate-General, the speaker of
legislative assembly, officers under the municipal act, members of a local government board,
University officials and teachers, but it will not issue against the managing committee of a
private school which is not appointed under the authority of a statue

SECTION 482:

The Inherent Powers of High Court in India

The essential object of criminal law is to protect society against criminals and law-
breakers. For this purpose, the law holds out threats of punishments to prospective
lawbreakers as well as attempts to make the actual offenders suffer the prescribed the
punishment for their crimes. Therefore, criminal law, in its wider sense, consists of both the
substantive criminal law as well as the procedural criminal law. Substantive criminal law
defines offences and prescribes punishments for the same, while the procedural law is to
administrate the substantive law

Our legal system’s law of crime is mainly contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
which has come into force from April 1, 1974. It provides the machinery for the detection of
crime, apprehension of suspected criminals, collection of evidence, determination of the guilt
or innocence of the suspected person and the imposition of suitable punishment on the guilty
person. In addition, this Code also deals with the prevention of offences (Sections 106- 124,
129- 132 and 144- 153), maintenance of wives, children and parents (Sections 125- 128) and
public.nuisances(Sections133-143).

The Code also controls and regulates the working of the machinery set up for the
investigation and trial of offences. On the one hand it has to give adequately wide powers to
make the investigation and adjudicatory processes strong, effective and efficient, and on the
other hand, it has to take precautions against errors of judgement and human failures and to
provide safeguards against probable abuse of powers by the police or judicial officers. This
often involves a “nice balancing of conflicting considerations, a delicate weighing of
opposing claims clamouring for recognition and the extremely difficult task of deciding
which of them should predominate”.
The Code has obviously tried to make itself exhaustive and complete in every respect; and it
has generally succeeded in this attempt. However, if the Court finds that the Code has not
made specific provision to meet the exigencies of any situation, the court of law has inherent
power to mould the procedure to enable it to pass such orders as the ends of justice may
require.

It has however been declared by the Supreme Court that the subordinate courts do not have
any inherent powers. The High Court has inherent powers and they have been given partial
statutory recognition by enacting 482 of code

Background of section 482

The power to quash an FIR (First Information Report) is among the inherent powers of the
High Courts of India. Courts possessed this power even before the Criminal Procedure Code
(CrPC) was enacted. Added as Section 482 by an amendment in 1923, it is a reproduction of
the section 561(A) of the 1898 code. Since high courts could not render justice even in cases
in which the illegal was apparent, the section was created as a reminder to the courts that they
exist to prevent injustice done by a subordinate court.

“Nothing in this code shall be deemed to limit or effect the inherent powers of the High Court
to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the code, or to
prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice”

Exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is the exception and not rule – Inherent
jurisdiction of High court under section 482 of Cr.P.C may be exceeded:

1. To give effect to an order undr the code:

Ordinarily HC will not interfere at an interlocutory stage of criminal proceeding in
subordinate court but, HC is under an obligation to interfere if there is harassment of
any person (Indian citizen) by illegal prosecution. It would also do so when there is
any exceptional or extraordinary reasons for doing so.
2. To prevent abuse of the process of the court:
Test to determine whether there has been any abuse of any court are
 See whether a bare statement of facts of case would be sufficient to convince
HC if it is a fit case for interference at intermediate stage.
  Whether in the admitted circumstances it would be a mock trial if case is
allowed to proceed.

Reasons for High Court can interfere:

 Long lapse of time

 Failure or impossibility to supply to accused, copies of police statements
and other relevant documents- grounds for other relevant documents-
grounds for HC to quash proceedings against accused.
3. To otherwise secure the ends of justice:
Eg. When a clear statutory provision of law is violated- HC can interfere. It is of
vital importance in the administration of justice, and ensure proper freedom and
independence of Judges must be maintained and allowed to perform their functions
freely and fearlessly without undue influence on anyone, even SC. At the same time
Judges and Magistrate should act with a certain amount of justice and fair play.

The SC in Madhu Limaye v. Maharashtra, has held the following principles would
govern the exrcise the inheritance jurisdiction of High Cout
I. Power is not to be resorted to if there is specific provision in code for redress
of grievances of aggrieved party.
II. Power is not to be resorted to if there is specific provision in code for redress
of grievances of ends of justice.
III. It should not be exercised against the express bar of the law engrafted in any
other provision of the code.

It is neither feasible nor practicable to lay down exhaustively as to on what ground the
jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should
be exercised. But some attempts have been made in that behalf in some of the decisions of
this Court.

LIMITATION ON SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C

Even though the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 is very wide, it
has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only when such exercise is
justified by the tests specifically laid down in the section itself. It is to be exercised exdebito
justitiae to do real and substantial justice for the administration of which alone, courts exist.
This view has been taken by the Hon'ble SC in many of its judgments including the recent
Monica Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh.

In a proceeding under section 482, the High Court will not enter into any finding of facts,
particularly when the matter has been concluded by concurrent finding of facts of two courts
below.

In State of Bihar and another v. K.J.D. Singh, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had a question
whether the Criminal Proceedings can be quashed even before the Commencement of the
Trial. The Supreme Court went ahead and held that "The inherent power under Section 482
has to be exercised for the ends of the justice and should not be arbitrarily exercised to cut
short the normal process of a criminal trial. After a review of catena of authorities, Pendian,
J. in Janta Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary (supra) has deprecated the practice of staying criminal
trials and police investigations except in exceptional cases and the present case is certainly
not one of these exceptional cases."

In R.P. Kapoor v. State of Punjab, Hon'ble Supreme court went on to limit the powers of the
Hon'ble High Court within the ambit of the Cr.P.C. It was held, "Inherent power of the High
Court cannot be invoked in regard to matters which are directly covered
by specific provisions in the Cr.P.C.".

It is well settled that the inherent powers under section 482 can be exercised only when no
other remedy is available to the litigant and NOT where a specific remedy is provided by the
statute. If an effective alternative remedy is available, the High Court will not exercise its
powers under this section, specially when the applicant may not have availed of that remedy.

THE HIGH COURTS OF INDIA: COMPOSITION, APPOINTMENT  OF JUDGES

AND OTHER DETAILS!

Article 214 says that every State has a High Court operating within its territorial
jurisdiction. But the Parliament has the power to establish a common High Court for two or
more States (Article 231). For Instance, Punjab and Haryana have a common High Court.
Similarly there is one High Court for Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura.

In India, neither the State executive nor the State Legislature has any power to control the
High Courts or two after its Constitution or organisation. It is only Parliament which can do
it. In case of Union Territories the Parliament may by law extend the jurisdiction of a High
Court to or exclude the jurisdiction of a High Court from any Union Territory, or create a
High Court for a Union Territory.

Thus Delhi, a Union Territory, has a separate High Court of its own while the Madras High
Court has jurisdiction over Pondicherry, the Kerala High Court over Lakshadweep and
Mumbai High Court over Dadra and Nagar Haveli, the Kolkata High Court over Andaman
and Nicobar Islands, the Punjab High court over Chandigarh.

COMPOSITION OF HIGH COURTS:

(i) Every High Court shall consists of a Chief Justice and such other judges as the President
of India may from time to time appoint.

(ii) Besides, the President has the power to appoint

(a) Additional Judges for a temporary period not exceeding two years, for the clearance of
areas of work in a High Court;

(b) an acting judge, when a permanent judge of a High Court (other than Chief Justice) is
temporarily absent or unable to perform his duties or is appointed to act temporarily as Chief
Justice.

But neither an additional nor an acting Judge can hold office beyond the age of 62 years (by
15th Amendment) Act age of retirement raised from 60 to 62.

APPOINTMENT AND CONDITIONS OF OFFICE OF A JUDGE OF A HIGH

COURT:

Every Judge of a High Court shall be appointed by the President. In making the appointment,
the President shall consult the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the State (and also the
Chief Justice of that High Court in the matter of appointment of a Judge other than the Chief
Justice).
TENURE:

A Judge of the High Court shall hold office until the age of 62 years.

Every Judge, permanent, additional or acting, may vacate his office earlier in any of the
following ways:

(i) by resignation in writing addressed to the President;

(ii) by being appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court or being transferred to any other
High Court, by the President;
(iii) by removal by the President on an address of both Houses of Parliament (supported
by the vote of 2/3 of the members present) on the ground of proved misbehaviour or
incapacity,. The mode of removal of a Judge of the High Court shall thus be the same
as that of a judge of the Supreme Court.

The power to issue writs or orders for As in the case of the Judges of the Supreme Court, the
Constitution seeks to maintain the independence of the Judges of the High Court’s by a
number of provisions, By laying down that a Judge of the High Court shall not be removed,
except in the manner provided for the removal of a Judge of the Supreme Court (Article 218);
(ii) by providing that the expenditure in respect of the salaries and allowances of the Judges
shall be charged on the Consolidated Fund of the State [Article 202 (3)(d)]; (iii) by specifying
in the Constitution the salaries payable to the Judges and providing that the allowances of a
Judge or his rights in respect of absence or pension shall not be varied by Parliament to his
disadvantage after his appointment (Article 221) except under a Proclamation of Financial
Emergency [Article 360 (4)(b)] (iv) by laying down that after retirement a permanent Judge
of High Court shall not plead or act in a Court or before any authority in India, except the
Supreme Court and a High Court other than the -High Court in which he had held his office
(Article 220).

TRANSFER OF CASES:

The procedure to be mandatorily followed while pursuing a case is briefly dealt with under
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Chapter XXXI of the Code contains the provisions
related to the transfer of the criminal cases from Section 406 to 411. The main reason behind
the incorporation of transfer of cases is that of delivering justice to people and to achieve the
same, the provisions regarding the right to appeal is also provided. The overburden of
pending cases and appeals results in delayed justice thus, it creates unrest in judicial
processes. So to address this problem, certain provisions have been brought to transfer the
criminal cases from one court to another. The right of appeal in the Supreme Court is
available only in exceptional cases. As per the Code of Criminal Procedure, the original court
of criminal appeal in the High Court.

GROUNDS FOR TRANSFER AND APPEAL OF CASES

 To uphold the spirit of justice: The ultimate goal of any judicial system on the
earth is the deliverance of justice and protection of the rights of every person. The
courts are highly revered institutions of justice with people having high
expectations of justice which is sought after by the aggrieved party. Therefore, the
court is under high moral obligations for keeping the machinery of justice, equity
and good conscience alive.
 Recommendations made by the superior judicial officers: The courts while
deciding whether to transfer the cases and appeals from one court to another takes
into consideration the inquiries and findings as revealed by the reports carried on
by the senior judicial officers such as Chief judicial magistrate or any sessions
judge.
 Upon request by the trial court: Where the court before which the matter is
pending deems the case to be outside its scope of jurisdiction due to involvement
of a substantial question of law which is outside its purview. It may request the
higher judiciary to transfer the case.
 Lack of complete jurisdiction: In certain cases, the court has limited jurisdiction
over the subject matter of the case before it. In such cases of shared or limited
juridical issues, the court trying the case has the liberty of transferring the case to
the court which possesses the conclusive jurisdiction of trying the matter. This
process ensures that complete justice has been done to the parties before the court.
 Differences between the party and the judicial officer: In circumstances where
there is already a presence of differences between the judicial officer and any of
 the party the chances of an unfair and partial trial being carried out are relatively
higher. Therefore, the party apprehending such consequences of carrying on of the
trial is granted the opportunity by the judicial system to apply for transfer of the
case.
 Infringement of principles of natural justice: Where the proof of continued
contravention of the principles of natural justice by any court or judicial officer is
rendered by a party to the Supreme Court, then in order to uphold the principles of
natural justice, the court may order the transfer of the case.

The very purpose of Criminal law is the free and fair dispersal of justice which is not
influenced by any extraneous considerations. Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedures
enables the party to seek for transfer of case anywhere within the state while Section 406 of
the Code enables the party to seek transfer of the case anywhere in the country.

TRANSFER OF CASES AND APPEALS BY HIGH COURT

Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the High Courts to transfer cases
and appeals.

CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH HC MAY ORDER THE TRANSFER OF A CASE

OR APPEAL

The High Court has the authority to transfer the cases when it is satisfied that:

 The right to a fair and impartial trial which is guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Indian Constitution can not be exercised by any of the party to the suit if the case
is tried by any of the courts which is subordinate to it;
 Certain questions pertaining to the present matter in the court are of unusual
difficulty;
 The transfer of the appeal or the case is made inevitable by any of the provisions
under the Code;
 The order of transfer will be in the interest of the general convenience of the
parties or witnesses involved in the suit.
ORDERS THAT THE HIGH COURT CAN PASS:

The High Court on being satisfied with the presence of the above-mentioned grounds can
order any of the following:

 The offence which is inquired into or tried by any Court subordinate to it be

inquired by any other court which is inclusively under both  Section
177 and Section 185 of the Code is not qualified but is otherwise competent to
inquire into or try offences like the ones which are in question;
 Where a particular case or appeal is pending before any criminal court which is
subordinate to it to any other criminal court which is having equal or superior
jurisdiction in comparison to the High Court;
 The particular case be laid down before the court of Sessions for hearing;
 The particular case or appeal be laid down before the High Court itself.

At whose instance the powers of transfer are exercised

The High Court exercises its power of transfer of cases at the following instances:

 When the lower court submits the report for transfer of an appeal or case to the
High Court;
 Where the interested party lays before the High Court, an application requesting
the transfer of a case or appeal;
 The High Court in its own discretion can transfer a case or appeal if it is satisfied
with the fact that it would be in the best interest of the parties to the suit.

However, the High Court while transferring a case must be mindful of the fact that no
application of transfer of the case from one criminal court to another is made in the same
sessions division unless an application for the transfer of the case has been made to the
sessions court and the same has been rejected by him.
PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED

Subsection 3 to Subsection 5 of Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure lays down the
procedure which has to be followed by the person who is making the application for the
transfer of appeals and cases by him.

 Subsection 3 of Section 407 of the Code provides that the application for the
transfer of cases to the High Court by the applicant shall be made by motion
which shall be supported by an affidavit or affirmation, except in the case where
the applicant is the Advocate General of the State;
 Subsection 4 of Section 407 of the Code provides that where the application for
the transfer of a case or an appeal is made by an accused person, the High Court
has the authority to direct him to execute a bond with or without surety for the
payment of any compensation which may be ordered to him by the court;
 Subsection 5 of Section 407 of the Code provides that every person who makes an
application for the transfer shall give to the public prosecutor in writing, a notice
to notify his intention for making such an application. The notice should be
accompanied by the grounds on which the application is made. This Section also
instructs the Courts not to make any order on the merits of the application so
submitted by the person, unless at least a time period of twenty-four hours has
elapsed between the making of such a notice and hearing of the application. 

Where the application is dismissed by the High Court

Subsection 7 of Section 407 of the Code contains provisions regarding the cases where the
High Court dismisses the application made to it under subsection 2 of Section 407 of the
Code. If the High Court finds that the application for the transfer of appeal or case was
vexatious and frivolous, it may order the applicant to pay a compensation of an amount not
exceeding one thousand rupees to any person who had opposed the application made by the
applicant. The court in such cases decided the compensation keeping in view, the facts and
circumstances of the case.
 Subsection 9 of Section 407 of the Code is the saving clause and it provides that nothing
contained under Section 407 of the Code shall have any effect on the orders which are passed
by the Government of India under Section 197 of the Code which prevents the courts from
taking cognizance of any case which involves the criminal charges against any public servant
unless a previous sanction has been obtained by the court from the competent authorities.

REVISIONAL POWERS OF HIGH COURT:

The revisional powers of a High Court are very wide. Section 397 which is linked with Sec.
401 indicates the circumstance in which such powers can be exercised. Such powers are
intended to be used by the High Court to decide all questions as to the correctness, legality or
propriety of any finding, sentence or order, recorded or passed by an inferior criminal court
and even as to the regularity of any proceeding of any inferior court. The object of conferring
such powers on the High Court is to clothe the highest court in a state with a jurisdiction of
general supervision and superintendence in order to correct grave failure or miscarriage of
justice arising from erroneous or defective orders. Section 401(1) confers on the High Court
all the powers of the appellate court as mentioned in Ss 386, 389 390 and 391. It also
empowers the High Court to direct tender of pardon to the accused person as contemplated by
S.307. Apart from these powers the court has given additional powers in respect of specific
cases falling under S. 106(4), 356(4), 357(4)….etc. Any order passed in any proceedings
under the Code, except when it is specifically barred such as an interlocutory order, is
revisable by the High Court under S.401.

The revisional powers under 397 and 401 are entirely discretionary. There is no vested right
of revision in the same sense in which there is vested right of appeal. These sections do not
create any right in the litigant, but only conserve the powers of the High Court to see that
justice is done in accordance with the recognized rules of criminal jurisprudence and that
subordinate criminal courts do not exceed their jurisdiction, or abuse the powers vested in
them by the Code.
JURISDICTION OF THE HIGH COURT AS A REVISIONAL POWER:

The High Courts power to jurisdiction to act as a revisional court has to be deduced from all
the provisions in section 397-401 read together. The points on which they are read together
are as follows:

1. The High Court my it self call for the record of an inferior court under section 397
either on the application of a party aggrieved suo moto which is section 401(1).
2. When the high court has before it on appeal the record of a criminal proceeding, it
may exercise its power of revision under section 401 in respect of a matter in regard
to which it could have otherwise exercised its power of revision even where the
appeal is incomplete. It should be noted that where in a proceeding on appeal the
court proposes to exercise its revisional powers; its intention to that effect should be
made clear in its orders. If however high court proceeds in exercise of its power as an
appellant court, assuming that the appeal is complete and subsequently it is
discovered that appeal was incompetent and that accordingly the order passed by the
high court was void, the order cannot be saved by treating it as having been passed by
the High Court as a court of revision.
3. The High Court may also exercise its revisional powers where the defect in the record
of a case before an inferior court comes to its knowledge in any other manner.