Home › MCQs › Criminal Procedure Code › Question #9515
Back to Questions
Criminal Procedure Code QUESTION #9515
Question 1
A High Court in revision sets aside an order of a subordinate Court and substitutes its own findings on facts. The party against whom the revisional order operates argues that the High Court exceeded its revisional jurisdiction. Is this argument sound?
  • No; the High Court can always substitute its own findings in revision
  • No; the High Court in revision can do anything the trial Court could do
  • Yes; revision is only available to correct jurisdictional errors confirmed by the Supreme Court
  • Yes; under Section 115 CPC, the High Court's revisional jurisdiction is supervisory and does not extend to correcting mere errors of fact; revision is available only where a Court has acted without jurisdiction, exceeded its jurisdiction, or acted with material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction✔️
Correct Answer Explanation
Section 115 CPC limits the High Court's revisional jurisdiction to cases where the subordinate Court has (a) exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, (b) failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or (c) acted in the exercise of jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity. Revision is not a second appeal and cannot be used to re-appreciate facts.