In short. A criminal revision asks the Delhi High Court or the Sessions Court to correct an order of a trial court that is illegal, improper or passed without jurisdiction, such as a summoning order, an order framing charge, a discharge, or the dismissal of a complaint. It is used by accused persons and complainants alike. A revision should be filed within about 90 days of the order, and many are decided within months, though some take longer. Get a certified copy of the order and the trial court record, then decide the forum with counsel.
Is this your situation?
- A Magistrate has summoned you as an accused on a private complaint that you believe does not make out any offence.
- The trial court has framed charges against you, or refused your discharge application, though the evidence does not support it.
- You are the complainant and the trial court has discharged the accused or dismissed your complaint.
- A Magistrate refused your application under Section 175(3) BNSS (old Section 156(3) CrPC) to direct the police to register an FIR.
- The Sessions Court has decided your appeal against a Magistrate's conviction, and you want the High Court to examine it.
- A trial court passed an order on documents, witnesses or property that goes to the root of the case.
- You are not sure whether the right remedy is a revision, an appeal or a petition under Section 528 BNSS.
What a criminal revision is, and what it is not
A revision is the High Court's supervisory power over criminal courts below it. Under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (old Section 397 CrPC), the High Court or the Sessions Judge can call for the record of any proceeding before an inferior criminal court to satisfy itself about the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, and the regularity of the proceedings. The powers it can then exercise are set out in Section 442 (old Section 401).
It is narrower than an appeal. In a revision the court does not ordinarily reweigh evidence or substitute its own view on facts for a reasonable view taken below. It interferes where the order is contrary to law, ignores material evidence, rests on no evidence, was passed without jurisdiction, or produces a result that no court properly applying its mind could have reached. A revision that simply argues the trial court should have believed a different witness usually fails.
Revisions are used at every stage of a criminal case: against the summoning order at the very start, against the framing of charge before evidence, against orders during trial, and against the Sessions Court's decision in an appeal from a Magistrate. Both the accused and the complainant can file one. If a final conviction in a Sessions trial is the problem, the remedy is an appeal, explained on our page on appeals against conviction in the Delhi High Court.
Orders most often challenged in revision
- Summoning orders in complaint cases. A Magistrate's order issuing process to an accused on a private complaint, for example in cheating, defamation or cheque cases, is a frequent target, especially against directors, family members and people living outside Delhi.
- Orders framing charge or refusing discharge. Where the material in the chargesheet does not disclose the offence charged, or discloses only a lesser offence, the accused can seek revision of the order on charge.
- Orders of discharge. The complainant or the State can challenge an order discharging the accused, arguing that the trial court ignored material showing a prima facie case.
- Dismissal of a complaint. A complainant whose complaint was dismissed under Section 226 BNSS (old Section 203 CrPC) without proper consideration can seek revision, and the court can direct further inquiry under Section 439 (old Section 398).
- Refusal to direct registration of an FIR. An order rejecting an application under Section 175(3) BNSS is commonly revised where the complaint plainly discloses a cognizable offence needing police investigation.
- Appellate judgments of the Sessions Court. When a Sessions Court decides an appeal against a Magistrate's conviction, including in cheque bounce cases, the next remedy in the High Court is a revision.
- Maintenance orders. Orders of Family Courts on maintenance under Section 144 BNSS (old Section 125 CrPC) are revised by the High Court, covered on our page on maintenance revision in the Delhi High Court.
The bar on revising interlocutory orders
Section 438(2) BNSS (old Section 397(2)) says the revisional power cannot be used against interlocutory orders. This is the first objection the other side raises, and the answer depends on what the order does. In Amar Nath v. State of Haryana (1977) and Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra (1977) the Supreme Court explained that purely interlocutory orders are those that deal with procedural steps without deciding any right, such as adjournments, directions for production of documents in the ordinary course, or orders on bail. Those cannot be revised.
Between purely interlocutory orders and final orders sits a middle category: orders that, if decided the other way, would end the proceeding. A summoning order and an order framing charge fall here. If the accused had succeeded, the case against him would have ended, so these orders are not purely interlocutory and a revision lies. The Supreme Court applied this reasoning to summoning orders in Urmila Devi v. Yudhvir Singh (2013) and has treated orders on charge the same way.
Where an order is truly interlocutory but causes serious injustice, the remedy is not a revision but a petition under Section 528 BNSS (old Section 482 CrPC) in the High Court. That route is narrow, and courts do not allow it to be used to get around the bar in Section 438(2) as a matter of course.
The revision provisions in plain words
Section 438, BNSS (old Section 397)
Gives the High Court and the Sessions Judge power to call for and examine records of inferior courts. Sub-section (2) bars revision of interlocutory orders. Sub-section (3) says that if a person has gone to either the High Court or the Sessions Judge, no further revision by the same person lies to the other.
Section 439, BNSS (old Section 398)
Allows the court, on examining the record, to direct further inquiry into a complaint that was dismissed, or into the case of an accused who was discharged. The accused must get an opportunity to show cause before an order for further inquiry against him.
Sections 440 and 441, BNSS (old Sections 399 and 400)
Set out the Sessions Judge's revisional powers, which are broadly the same as those of the High Court, and allow an Additional Sessions Judge to hear revisions transferred to him.
Section 442, BNSS (old Section 401)
The High Court's revisional powers mirror its appellate powers. No order can be passed to the prejudice of the accused without hearing him. The High Court cannot convert an acquittal into a conviction in revision. A party who could have appealed but did not cannot file a revision instead, and a revision filed under a mistaken belief that no appeal lies can be treated as an appeal.
Sessions Court or High Court: which forum hears your revision
For orders of a Magistrate, the High Court and the Sessions Court have concurrent revisional jurisdiction. You can choose either. But Section 438(3) means you only get one: if you file before the Sessions Court and lose, you cannot file a second revision in the High Court. The Supreme Court in Krishnan v. Krishnaveni (1997) held that the High Court can still intervene under its inherent power in exceptional cases, but that is not a second revision as of right.
The choice is strategic. The Sessions Court at the same court complex is closer, often quicker, and suitable for orders that turn on a straightforward reading of the record. The High Court is the better forum for orders that raise a point of law, involve several connected complaints, or concern accused who also need relief under Section 528, which only the High Court can give. Orders passed by a Sessions Court itself, as trial court or in appeal, can be revised only by the High Court.
For trial courts in Delhi, at Tis Hazari, Patiala House, Saket, Karkardooma, Rohini, Dwarka and Rouse Avenue, the High Court is the Delhi High Court at Sher Shah Road, and revisions are heard by a single judge on the criminal side under the roster. If the trial court is in Gurugram or Faridabad, the revision goes to the Punjab and Haryana High Court; if in Noida or Ghaziabad, to the Allahabad High Court. Where you live does not change this.
Advocate B.K. Singh usually prefers the High Court where the accused is one of several people summoned on the same complaint, because one petition can then address all of them and the court can also exercise its Section 528 power if the whole complaint turns out to be an abuse. Where a single order turns on one clear error, such as a charge framed for an offence whose ingredients are missing, the Sessions Court can be the quicker and equally effective forum.
Challenging a summoning order
Summoning an accused is a serious step. The Supreme Court said in Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Special Judicial Magistrate (1998) that criminal law cannot be set in motion as a matter of course, and that the Magistrate must examine the nature of the allegations and the evidence before issuing process. A summoning order that simply reproduces the complaint, without showing that the Magistrate applied his mind to each accused, is open to challenge.
The BNSS has added safeguards. Under the proviso to Section 223, a Magistrate cannot take cognizance on a complaint without first giving the accused an opportunity of being heard. Where the accused lives outside the Magistrate's territorial area, Section 225 (old Section 202) makes an inquiry or investigation mandatory before process is issued. Summoning orders passed in disregard of these steps are among the easier revisions to argue.
Directors, partners and family members are often summoned in complaint cases only because of their position. Unless a statute creates vicarious liability, as Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act does for companies, the complaint must state what each accused did. For the wider strategy, see our guide on challenging a summoning order in a complaint case and, for complaints over posts and publications, our page on criminal defamation complaints.
Challenging charges or the refusal to discharge
At the stage of charge, the trial court looks at the chargesheet and documents to see whether there is ground for presuming that the accused committed the offence. The test, from Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal (1979), is whether the material discloses grave suspicion that has not been properly explained. Mere suspicion is not enough; proof beyond doubt is not required. The accused can apply for discharge under Section 250 BNSS (old Section 227) in a sessions case or Section 262 (old Section 239) in a Magistrate's warrant case, and the BNSS now requires the discharge application to be made within sixty days.
A revision against charge succeeds where the trial court framed charge for an offence whose ingredients are not even alleged, ignored a document of sterling quality that destroys the prosecution case, or charged a graver offence than the material supports, for example murder where the facts suggest at most culpable homicide or hurt. It does not succeed by arguing that prosecution witnesses are lying; that is for trial. Our guide on seeking discharge and challenging charges covers the trial court stage.
When Advocate B.K. Singh reviews an order on charge, he sets out each ingredient of the offence in one column and the page of the chargesheet that supports it in another. Where a column is empty, the revision has a real point. Where every ingredient has some material behind it, however weak, he usually advises the client that the better course is to test the evidence at trial.
Revision by complainants and victims
Complainants use revision more than they realise. If the Magistrate dismissed your complaint without examining your witnesses properly, refused to direct an FIR on a complaint disclosing a cognizable offence, or discharged the accused while ignoring the material on record, a revision can correct it. The High Court can direct further inquiry or order the trial court to reconsider.
The accused must be heard. Under Section 442(2), no order to the prejudice of the accused can be passed without giving him an opportunity of being heard, and the Supreme Court in Manharibhai Muljibhai Kakadia v. Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Patel (2012) held that even a person not yet summoned is entitled to be heard in a revision against dismissal of the complaint. So expect the accused to appear and oppose.
A complainant cannot use revision to turn an acquittal into a conviction; Section 442(3) bars that. Against an acquittal, the remedy is an appeal by the victim or the State, explained on our page on appeals against acquittal. A revision against acquittal can at most lead to a retrial in exceptional cases, such as where material evidence was wrongly excluded.
How a revision petition is filed and heard
Get the impugned order and the record
Apply for a certified copy of the order you want to challenge, and collect the complaint or chargesheet, the documents, the order sheets and any written arguments filed below. The revision court looks at what was before the trial court, so the record must be complete.
Decide whether revision is the right remedy
Check whether the order is purely interlocutory, whether an appeal lies instead, and whether a revision has already been filed in the other forum. If the order is interlocutory but causes grave injustice, or if quashing of the entire case is sought, a petition under Section 528 may fit better. Our guide on how to file a criminal revision walks through this.
Draft the revision petition
The petition sets out the facts, the order challenged, the specific errors of law or jurisdiction, and the relief sought. It is supported by an affidavit and the documents relied on, filed with a vakalatnama, and accompanied by applications for stay and condonation of delay if needed.
First hearing and notice
At the first listing the court decides whether to issue notice to the State and the other side, and whether to grant interim relief, such as exemption from appearance or a stay of further proceedings. It may also call for the trial court record.
Replies and hearing
The State and the respondent file their replies, if any. Revisions are often decided on the record without lengthy pleadings. At the hearing, counsel takes the court to the specific pages that show the error.
Order
The court may dismiss the revision, set aside the order, remand the matter to the trial court for fresh consideration, direct further inquiry, or modify the order, for example by setting aside a charge for a graver offence and leaving a lesser charge in place.
Time and cost for a criminal revision
| Stage | Typical time | Court fee and costs (general) |
|---|---|---|
| Certified copy of order and trial record | A few days to two weeks | Copying charges at trial court rates |
| Advice on remedy and forum, drafting | One to two weeks | No court fee; lawyer's fee agreed in writing at the first meeting |
| Filing within the limitation period | About 90 days from the order is the period generally applied | Nominal court fee on revision petitions and applications; check the current fee |
| First hearing, notice and interim relief | Within days to a few weeks of filing | No further court fee |
| Replies and final hearing | A few months to a year or more, depending on the bench and whether a stay is in place | Process fee for service on respondents; photocopy charges |
| Remand proceedings in trial court, if ordered | Weeks to months | As in the trial court |
Timelines vary widely. Revisions where the trial has been stayed are sometimes heard sooner; revisions without a stay may wait while the trial goes on. No outcome or date can be promised.
Documents checklist for a revision
- Certified copy of the order under challenge
- Complaint or FIR, and the chargesheet with documents if filed
- Pre-summoning evidence and statements, in a complaint case
- Discharge application, reply and written submissions filed in the trial court
- Order sheets of the trial court showing dates and appearances
- Earlier orders of any court in the same matter, including bail orders
- Proof of date of knowledge of the order, if the revision is late
- Vakalatnama and identity proof of the petitioner
- Any settlement, civil suit or connected case papers that bear on the dispute
Time limit for a criminal revision
The BNSS itself does not fix a period for revision. Courts apply Article 131 of the Limitation Act 1963, which gives ninety days for revision petitions, by analogy, counting from the date of the order. Time spent obtaining the certified copy is excluded. A revision filed after ninety days needs an application for condonation of delay with a proper explanation.
Courts are usually more forgiving of delay in criminal matters than in civil ones, particularly where the accused faces trial on a charge that should not exist. But a long, unexplained delay weakens the revision, because it suggests the order did not cause the prejudice now claimed. If the trial has moved on in the meantime, with witnesses examined, the High Court may decline to interfere and leave the points for final arguments.
Will the trial stop while the revision is pending?
Not automatically. Filing a revision does not stay proceedings before the trial court. If you want the trial paused, you must ask for a stay, and the High Court grants one only where the revision raises a serious question and continuing the trial would cause real harm, for example where the accused would otherwise have to face a full trial on a charge that may be set aside.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly cautioned High Courts against staying trials for long periods, particularly in corruption and serious cases. In practice the Delhi High Court often grants a limited stay, or exempts the accused from personal appearance, or directs that the trial continue but no final judgment be pronounced until the revision is decided. Our page on stay of summons or trial proceedings explains these options.
Keep appearing before the trial court, or obtain exemption, until a stay order is actually passed. Missing a date because a revision has been filed can lead to warrants.
A made-up example: the sister-in-law summoned in a Rohini complaint
Here's a made-up example. A trader in Rohini files a private complaint for cheating against a firm that failed to pay for goods. He names the firm's proprietor, the proprietor's wife and his sister-in-law, who lives in Jaipur and has never worked in the business. The Magistrate records the trader's statement and summons all three without any inquiry about the sister-in-law and without hearing the accused.
The sister-in-law files a revision in the Delhi High Court. She points out that the complaint says nothing about her except her name, that she lives outside the Magistrate's area so an inquiry under Section 225 was mandatory, and that she was not heard under the proviso to Section 223. She asks for exemption from personal appearance meanwhile.
In a case like this the High Court might exempt her from appearance, issue notice, and later set aside the summoning order against her, while leaving the case against the proprietor to proceed or to be examined in his own petition. If the trader had produced documents showing she signed the purchase orders, the result could be different. The decision always turns on the record.
Mistakes that sink revision petitions
- Choosing the Sessions Court without thinking ahead. Losing there closes the door to a second revision in the High Court. Pick the forum with the possible next step in mind.
- Revising a purely interlocutory order. Petitions against adjournments, routine directions or bail orders are dismissed at the threshold.
- Arguing facts as if at trial. The revision court will not decide which witness is telling the truth. Show an error of law, a missing ingredient or ignored material.
- Incomplete record. A petition without the complaint, the pre-summoning evidence or the documents relied on below cannot show what the trial court had before it.
- Stopping attendance in the trial court. Until a stay or exemption is granted, the accused must appear.
- Filing a revision where an appeal lies. Section 442(4) bars a revision by a party who could have appealed. Check the remedy first.
Revision, appeal or Section 528: telling them apart
An appeal lies against a conviction, an acquittal, or certain final orders where a statute specifically provides one, and it allows a full rehearing on facts. A revision lies against other orders of inferior criminal courts, final or intermediate, and is limited to legality, propriety and jurisdiction. A petition under Section 528 BNSS invokes the High Court's inherent power to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice, and is used most often to quash an FIR or an entire proceeding.
The remedies overlap. A summoning order can be challenged in revision or under Section 528, and the High Court will usually entertain either if the case is strong. Where the whole case, not just one order, is an abuse, a quashing petition is the natural choice; see our page on quashing an FIR in the Delhi High Court, and for business disputes dressed up as crimes, our page on quashing a cheating FIR over a money dispute. Where a single order is wrong and the rest of the case can stand, a revision fits better.
What to do this week
Note the date of the order and count ninety days. Apply for the certified copy. Collect everything filed in the trial court so far, and write down the next date of hearing there. If you are the accused, arrange to appear or seek exemption on that date. If you are the complainant, gather the evidence the trial court overlooked and mark the pages.
For advice on whether a revision is the right remedy against the order in your case, or for updates on how the courts are applying the BNSS, contact Advocate B.K. Singh.
Frequently asked questions
What is the time limit for filing a criminal revision?
The BNSS does not fix one, but courts apply the ninety-day period in Article 131 of the Limitation Act by analogy, counted from the order. Time to get the certified copy is excluded, and late revisions can be filed with an application explaining the delay.
Can I file a revision against a summoning order in the Delhi High Court?
Yes. A summoning order is not treated as purely interlocutory, so a revision lies in the High Court or the Sessions Court. A petition under Section 528 BNSS is also available, and the choice depends on the facts and whether the whole case or only the summons is under attack.
If my revision is dismissed by the Sessions Court, can I go to the High Court?
Not by way of a second revision, which Section 438(3) bars. The High Court may still intervene under Section 528 BNSS in exceptional cases where there is a clear miscarriage of justice, but that is not available as of right.
Can the complainant file a revision against discharge of the accused?
Yes. A complainant or the State can challenge a discharge order in revision. The accused must be heard before the order is set aside, and the court will check whether the trial court ignored material showing grave suspicion.
Does filing a revision stop the trial?
No. The trial continues unless the revision court passes a stay order. You must keep appearing, or obtain exemption, until such an order is made.
Can a bail order be challenged by revision?
Generally no, because bail orders are treated as interlocutory. A refused bail is pursued by a fresh application to the higher court, and a wrongly granted bail by an application for cancellation.
Can the High Court convict an accused in a revision against acquittal?
No. Section 442(3) BNSS bars converting an acquittal into a conviction in revision. At most, in exceptional cases, the High Court can set aside the acquittal and order a retrial.
Is a lawyer needed for a criminal revision in the Delhi High Court?
A party can appear in person, but revisions turn on legal points and the record, and the court expects precise arguments. Most people engage counsel, and those who cannot afford one can apply for legal aid.