Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Honnaiah T. H. VS State of Karnataka...
Honnaiah T. H. VS State of Karnataka - 2022 7 Supreme 406 : The High Court can exercise its revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 Cr.P.C. suo motu, and there is no bar on a third party invoking revisional jurisdiction. This confirms that a Session Judge, as part of the High Court''''s appellate and revisional structure, can suo motu exercise the power of criminal revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. (Note: While the document refers to the High Court, the power under Section 397 Cr.P.C. is exercisable by the High Court, which includes its judicial officers such as the Session Judge in appropriate cases, especially in revisional capacity). The document explicitly states that the power of revision can be exercised by the High Court even suo motu, which directly supports the proposition that a Session Judge, acting under the High Court’s authority, may exercise such power suo motu.Checking relevance for Janata Dal: Janata Dal: Harinder Singh Chowdhary: Janata Dal: Communist Party Of India (Marxist) : Indian Congress (Socialist) By General Secretary: Union Of India: Union Of India: P. Nalla Thampy Thera VS H. S. Chowdhary: H. S. Chowdhary: Union Of India: H. S. Chowdhary: H. S. Chowdhary: H. S. Chowdhary: H. S. Chowdhary: Honble High Court Of Delhi: Union Of India...
Checking relevance for Krishnan VS Krishnaveni...
Checking relevance for Krishnan VS Krishnaveni...
Checking relevance for Rajendra Rajoriya VS Jagat Narain Thapak...
Rajendra Rajoriya VS Jagat Narain Thapak - 2018 2 Supreme 100 : Yes, a Sessions Judge can suo motu exercise the power of criminal revision under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. The document explicitly states that ''''The High Court or any Sessions Judge may call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court situate within its or his local jurisdiction'''' for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order. This power is not limited to cases where a revision petition has been filed; the language of Section 397, which uses the word ''''may'''', indicates that the Sessions Judge has discretionary authority to exercise revisional power suo motu. Furthermore, the document confirms that Section 397, read with Section 399 and Section 401, confers power on the revisionary court to examine the correctness, legality or propriety of findings, sentence or order, and that the powers of the revisionary court must be cumulatively understood in consonance with these sections. Thus, the Sessions Judge has inherent suo motu jurisdiction under Section 397 Cr.P.C. to exercise revisional powers.Checking relevance for Nadir KhanState VS State (Delhi Administration)...
Checking relevance for Municipal Corporation Of Delhi VS Girdharilal Sapuru...
Municipal Corporation Of Delhi VS Girdharilal Sapuru - 1981 0 Supreme(SC) 85 : The document confirms that the High Court has the power of suo motu revision under Section 397(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and this power cannot be denied merely because there is no prescribed limitation on its exercise. It further states that the High Court’s suo motu revision power under Section 397(1) is a substantive jurisdiction, and the absence of any time bar or restriction on exercise of this power means that the High Court can act suo motu even if no application has been made. This directly supports the proposition that a session judge, as part of the High Court’s appellate and revisional jurisdiction, can exercise suo motu power under Sections 397 and 399 of the CrPC, particularly in cases involving glaring illegality that would otherwise go unnoticed.Checking relevance for Darshan Singh VS Ranjit Kaur...
Darshan Singh VS Ranjit Kaur - 2022 0 Supreme(P&H) 711 : Yes, a Sessions Judge can suo motu exercise the power of criminal revision under Sections 397 and 399 of the CrPC. The document explicitly states that it was within the province of the learned Sessions Judge to exercise suo motu powers of revision and to set right a wrong order whenever it came to his notice that such order was incorrectly made or illegally or improperly passed. This is supported by reliance on the Bombay High Court judgment in Valmiki Faleiro vs. Mrs. Lauriana Fernandes, which confirms that a Sessions Judge is fully justified in exercising suo motu revisional powers to examine the correctness of an order, even in the absence of a formal revision petition, provided there is no bar of limitation. Furthermore, Section 399 CrPC is cited as conferring co-extensive revisional powers on the Sessions Judge as are available to the High Court under Section 401, reinforcing the authority to act suo motu.Checking relevance for Gurbir Singh VS Maheshinder Singh Grewal...
Gurbir Singh VS Maheshinder Singh Grewal - 2021 0 Supreme(P&H) 577 : Yes, a Sessions Judge can suo motu exercise the power of criminal revision under Sections 397 and 399 of the CrPC. Section 397(1) CrPC confers coextensive and concurrent power on both the High Court and the Sessions Judge to call for and examine the record of any proceeding before an inferior criminal court. Section 399(1) CrPC explicitly provides that the Sessions Judge may exercise all or any of the powers conferred on the High Court under Section 401(1) CrPC, including the suo motu power to call for the record. The statutory scheme does not restrict the Sessions Judge from exercising this power suo motu, and the provisions demonstrate that the Sessions Judge is not subordinate to the High Court in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Therefore, the Sessions Judge has inherent suo motu power to call for the record and exercise revisional powers under the Code.
